City Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening, everyone, and welcome to this meeting of the Syracuse Planning Commission. We'll begin with our public hearings momentarily, but before we do that, I just want to double check for any last-minute adjustments to the agenda in case someone's here for something that isn't going to go forward for this evening. So, Jay, can you just give us a quick update, anything that has changed in terms of our agenda?

Yes. The first listed item Under our public hearing for new business, it's major site plan review 2026-19 has been postponed. Anybody here for that this evening, we apologize, but we expect to have that on a later agenda. Also, before we get to our first resubdivision, I'm told the applicant is not here yet for that. So if we can maybe come back to that, hopefully they'll show up here in the next few minutes. Sure.

All right, thanks for that update on the agenda. And for the first item, when it does reappear per request of the applicant, the regular notification process will be followed, right, with the postcards and so forth.

That's correct.

So there will be notification on that one. So first of all, our first item of business would be action on the minutes of our meeting on June 8th, earlier this month. Those minutes have been distributed in advance to the commission members. And it would be appropriate at this time for action on those minutes. Is there such a motion? Thank you. Second. Thank you. Discussion on the motion before us for the minutes of the June 8th meeting? If not, all in favor of that motion, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Those opposed, please say nay. Any abstentions? Our minutes are approved. And as we begin the public hearings for this evening, just a word of process for those who might be unfamiliar with this procedure. As each application is announced, we ask that the applicant or the representative come to the podium in the front of the room here, provide their name and address for the record, and then a brief summary of the application involved. Following questions from the commission members, we will invite members of the public who wish to speak in favor of the application to do that and then likewise an Opportunity for those who wish to speak in opposition to the application to do that as well Where comments are offered in opposition? we will encourage the applicant to return to address the comments made in opposition and we ask that all speakers either for or against hold their comments to about three minutes so that everyone has an opportunity to weigh in and So with that, we will skip over the second item on the agenda, the subdivision, in the hopes that the applicant will be here later on in the course of the meeting, and we'll move to the next application after that.

First up is a street abandonment project, SA-2026-01. SA-2026-01. uh... on west florence have owned by the city of syracuse before we uh... turn this over to we michael from assessment uh... street action is a review by this body uh... with a recommendation to counsel like any other street action uh... this will be reviewed in the form of a major site plan review for the mechanism to come before this body and then be referred to Council with your recommendation. So Common Council has final decision as the governing body for this. But with that, it's also labeled as Major Site Plan Review 2026-30. Great. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good evening. Michael Lehman. Deputy Commissioner of Assessment, City of Syracuse, applicants 233 East Washington Street, Syracuse, New York. As Deputy Commissioner Deschamps just described, we're petitioning for an abandonment of a portion of West Florence Avenue, where it's adjacent to Midland Avenue, immediately south of the residential property at 3316 Midlands. The purpose of the abandonment would be to sell the property to the owner of 3316 Midland Avenue briefly as an extension of their property to be used for residential recreational purposes. Are there any questions?

This won't affect the walkway over to the...

school and the little league fields correct it will not yes um the way it will work if you see the the walkway there is indicated um there's a buffer of approximately six feet to the south uh they'll be the same buffer remaining after the subdivision and potential disposition so it isn't um making it any shorter than it is on the other side

Thank you. Just to clarify for people who are listening, there's no filing requirement until the resub is actually completed with the property owner that wants to buy that portion of the property. Is that correct?

Would you repeat that, please?

There's no filing required with the county clerk's office until the person who wants to acquire that property does the resub and acquires it. Is that correct?

Correct.

Okay.

Thank you. Other questions for the applicant? Okay, thank you. 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 comments.

Good evening. My name is Carl Belcher. I am the owner of 3316 Midland Avenue. This proposal was really something that Russell Houck brought up to me as we were discussing the revitalization of that walkway as a part of the Creekwalk extension. He thought that this would be a win-win where my family already maintains and uses that land. And so we are in some ways just hoping to codify what we already use, put it on the city's tax bill as well. So it feels like a win-win situation for everybody. Thank you.

Other individuals who wish to speak in favor of this application, please come forward. Anyone wishing to speak in opposition to the application, please come forward. We apparently have no additional speakers. We can close public comment on this application and turn to our seeker review.

Has everyone had an opportunity to review the EAF Part 1 prepared by the applicant and containing your packet?

Yes.

Has everyone had an opportunity to review the EAF Part 2 prepared by staff and containing your packet? No. Yes. Does anyone believe that the proposed action will have a moderate to large impact under SECRA? 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 3 accordingly.

Thank you. Is there a motion for a SECRA action on this application? Make a motion to issue a negative SECRA declaration. Thank you both. Discussion on this motion? If there's no discussion, all in favor of the motion, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed, please say nay. Any abstentions? Seeker motion carries. And we may now turn our attention to the street abandonment action that will come in the form of a recommendation from this body to the council. Is there a motion for action on this?

Make a motion to approve SA-2026-01 as presented with an affirmative recommendation to the Common Council for approval. Thank you. And there are no conditions that need to be attached.

Is there a second?

Second.

Thank you. Discussion on this motion for the recommendation for abandonment? If not, all in favor of that motion, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed, please say nay. Any abstentions? So that motion carries. It'll be moved to the Common Council for final disposition. Thank you. I noticed a couple of people who walked in when we were discussing this item. Might they be from the church?

I don't think so. But I guess we can ask, is an owner applicant here representing the re-subdivision for 307 Emerson? I'm told it should be Father Ambrose himself, so we'll keep a lookout. We will keep a lookout.

Meanwhile, we will forge ahead. Yeah.

Next up is another major site plan review. This is at 115 South Geddes Street, MASPR-2026-33. It's owned by the New York Railway Company in the Light Industrial Zone District.

Good evening. Thank you, good evening. My name is Brian Bouchard. I'm with CHA Consulting, 300 South State Street, Syracuse. And I'm the project engineer working on behalf of both the City of Syracuse and the applicant, who is a New York Susquehanna Western Railway Company. And before you is a site plan application for the construction of a parking lot that's actually associated with the new City of Syracuse public safety facility. So as you probably know, the Syracuse Police Department and Syracuse Fire Departments have their new facility just down the street at 1153 West Fayette Street. It's the renovated Leip Rollaway Building. I believe I discussed that with the Planning Commission almost probably two years ago. And they have fully occupied that building. They're obviously now operational out of that facility. But there are a few ongoing projects to further support their operations there. Obviously, the parking lot that is proper to 1153 is complete and accessible. Probably aware of the Magnolia lot, which is directly west of that, that was just awarded, designed, awarded, and I believe started construction last week. There's also a small extension of the existing parking lot that's currently, I believe, awaiting award by the Common Council in order to start construction. And then really the last piece to fill out the parking program for the police and fire department is the construction of this, I guess you could call it satellite or accessory parking lot that will be used by police and fire department personnel. So the project site includes two different pieces of land. One is the city-owned property that you can kind of see off the right-hand side of the screen there where there's a thick dashed black line. That piece of city property is the Lake Art Park. Currently you can kind of see the existing stone dust trail walking trail and there's also public art displays Throughout that property that kind of extends all the way along the north side of West Fayette Street essentially between the railroad tracks and The public roadway and then next to it where you can see more of the parking lot is currently railroad property that had a former bicycle dirt track a pump track and on that piece and the city will lease a portion of that railroad property in order to use and occupy it as a New parking lot associated with the public safety building So you could see just off the bottom of the screen I don't know if you can maybe zoom out a little bit I'll walk you around the site plan to show you the different components. The city has installed a new driveway curb cut that will be used to create a new asphalt driveway into the site and It will be positioned so that it does not impede upon any of the light bar park. There's some artwork out there in the walking trail. So we'll be about 12 feet away from any of the improved areas on the city piece of the of the park there. And then you can see that the driveway will actually be shared with the rat road as an owner. They have an existing access gate to get to their railroad tracks that's a locked gate and a fence there so we'll provide an extension of the paved driveway, so that they can continue to access the remainder of their property within. the railroad tracks the unused portion of the railroad property Outside of the tracks and outside of the fence obviously will be improved as you can see with 72 parking spaces This will be for employees for police and fire. We've included Security fencing so it'll be access controlled. So there'll be security fencing and an access gate to swipe in and out and There'll be site lighting and security infrastructure. Because of the size of the pavement, we're also going to be treating and managing stormwater and providing the green spaces to the north for snow storage. And you can see if you scroll down just a little bit, we're going to have our stormwater management area, but there's another strip of land that's kind of pre-planned for the intended construction of the west side, essentially a multimodal trail that'll navigate this corridor along West Fayette Street. So we have reserved the land there for that future trial project should it move forward. You can also see where that kind of approaches the existing railroad bridge. You can kind of see it kind of grown in with grass there. It's in a little bit of Disrepair but that old railroad bridge our office and structural engineers had a chance to go out and do a bridge inspection there So for the purpose of this project We will be temporarily repairing that and creating a walkway so that the police and fire employees can walk across the bridge and then down West Fayette Street essentially skipping two of the more heavily traveled legs of the intersection there for the pedestrian crossings with South get us directly adjacent to us heading north and southbound and Um, obviously that'll be temporary and then, you know, the future West side trail will make some significant improvements to that, to, uh, carry the multimodal and bicycles and other things, um, as a, as a separate project to this site plan. We did have some comments that came back from the zoning office. So what you see before you is the most up to date where we did add some, um, accessory bike parking to the sidewalk. And then we also designated and labeled the required snow storage areas. The remainder of the application remains consistent with all other aspects of the zoning requirements for parking lot, including the green spaces, et cetera. And the parking lot is an allowed use within the allied district. The application, obviously, it's a city project, but still requires CPC approval as the next step really in our timeline. as we look to then prepare the construction documents for bid, publish that public advertisement for bidding, go through the bidding process or the project, get our permits, and hopefully start construction later this year. So with that, I can answer any questions you have or public comments as well.

Thank you. Questions for the applicant?

A question about the bicycle parking area and the gate on Geddes Street. That's going to get only for pedestrian access?

Correct. So the intent is that they obviously work over at the facility, so they'll be walking here. That gate would be key carded to their badges, so it's the same key cards that would be in the Magnolia lot or the lot proper, and that's just to make a secure... secure parking area for their police equipment and when they're changing out bags and stuff so that would be a Secured access point and then you would obviously walk into the parking lot there Correct it would only be for pedestrians there are weight limitations on the bridge currently so it would just be for Pedestrians to walk that route. Yeah. Yep. All the vehicle access comes in the roadway entrance. I

I just had a question out of curiosity of the 115 South Goddess Street. I couldn't find that address on any maps, except that it's two blocks down towards every boulevard.

It's a large parcel, and we're only using a very small smidgen of it. So you could see that that railroad parcel is, I think it's five acres or seven acres. It's a crazy shape. In terms of Onondaga County tax maps, that is the tax parcel address for that piece, but it's frontage. Yeah, there you go. So you can see how it's an oddly-shaped parcel, and that is its formal address on tax records. Obviously, our driveway entrance is on Fayette. I think that's the city address for the city property, but most of the improvements are happening on the 115 South Gatta Street, so we just use that as the address for the improvements. Great, thanks.

Mm-hmm. Further questions? Okay, thank you. Are there individuals who would like to speak in favor of this application? If so, please come to the podium. I see a couple people interested, so just sort it out between yourselves and give your name, address, and then your comments.

My name is Rick Testito. I own the gear factory at 200 South Ghetto Street. I'm not here trying to stop this. I'm not bringing a bunch of protesters and artists and volunteers and people from the community to stop it. But I want to give you a little background on how this came about. I've been working closely with the park since we created it in 2007. I'm on the board of Friends of Life Art Park. I own the building Kitty Corner, developed the parking lot across the street from there, West A.S. Street. I did the development project of Ponchitos with Home Headquarters. And I lived in the neighborhood for a very long time, put a lot of effort into this. The pump track, I arranged the agreement with the railroad company to put the pump track there. I arranged for home headquarters to hold those temporary lease on it. That fence that's up along South Guetta Street, I arranged for that to be put in. We used TNT money for that. We raised about another $10,000 to get the dirt and everything for developing the actual pump track. Myself and other people in the community rented machinery to build that pump track. It looks like it doesn't look great now because we were maintaining everything. It gets really hard. But the idea was that as things went along, we were talking with the city about the city eventually taking over that property, making it part of Lightbar Park. Myself and other volunteers already spoke with Bella Solutions. They design and facilitate the process for building pump tracks. So when the city... I'm really glad to have the police next door. They got a really, really hard job, and I don't think enough people appreciate them. But we had to be good neighbors to each other. The way this was described to me and others was that this was going to be a temporary parking installation. It was going to be used by the police and the fire department, but it was going to be kind of a public parking, private for the police, public parking. some kind of an arrangement so that the public could use it too, like a shared use. The giant security fence and the electronic security gate make me feel very different about the intention of that, right? And we were also told that we'll eventually, there are funds earmarked to rebuild another pump track. I know a lot of this There's a lot of things up in the air right now with the police moving the other parking from Erie Boulevard over to the building and a lot of other things, a lot of different things going on. But the discussions we've had for years and years was eventually, as that bike trail gets developed along West Fayette Street, was trying to create parking to the west side of South Getta Street there. That would be more accessible to police and visitors to the area and for area businesses because there might look like there's a lot of parking in that area, but it's very divided up between very specific property owners and some other properties. There's a lot of square footage and hardly any any parking. And we need more tourism, we need more activity, and we need for people to be able to get to our public resources like the parks. And I was trying to get a tenant earlier this year that would add around 100 visitors, you know, a few times a week that I don't have parking for. But long story short, I just wanted to say that there's been hundreds of... You know, volunteers, community members, artists, thousands of hours put into this. Talking with a railroad company multiple times to get that together. And again, I'm not trying to stop this. I'm just trying to let you guys know the intent was that this is going to be, as far as I knew, this is going to be a temporary solution for police parking. It was going to have some sort of a shared purpose. public private use agreement and somewhat for the police and for public to use for the park also and They the police have also had to take over other parking in the area so now there's even less parking for other businesses around and I Just wanted you to understand the intent that myself and other people in the area have and volunteers in the park understood this to be. And if I can make any suggestions and changes to the plan, is there any way to request that the fencing on the south and east side of the parking lot and the gate is removed so it's more general for police and public use during certain times of the day? Can I request that?

You can request that and I think for purposes of public comment, I think, uh, and for simplicity, I would probably put your comments into the 2nd category. Not that you said you're trying to stop this, but somewhat opposed in 1 sense. And for that reason, I would, um. Ask the applicant to return after other speakers have voiced their comments either for or against and take up the point that you raised about possible changes and so forth.

Yeah. And again, I'm not trying to stop this as a temporary solution for the police, but we're expecting something different down the road. But a lot of great things happening in the area. I want to continue that. I just don't want this to be one of those things where people say one thing and it ends up being another. So now you know. So we'll see what happens.

Thank you. Are there other people who wish to then come up, sir, please, and provide your name and your address and your comments for the record?

My name is Steve Dallef. I represent Nick Realty 220 South Gettysburg. I am not clear the presentation of this parking lot, exactly where is it, comparison to Ghetto Street and Fayette Street, where is this parking lot? Okay, how would you access this parking lot, from before the restaurant or at the corner?

Before. That was part of the presentation that may have been underway before you arrived with the applicant. And it sounds like we will want him to maybe address, hear all the comments made and then come back and kind of comprehensively address different points that are made. So you obviously raised a question about access, point of access. So we can ask him to address that as well.

I drive through there two, three times every day. If they intend to put the driveway in a corner of Fayette Street and Gettys Street after the restaurant, that's not doable. You got fire extinguisher, I mean fire hydrant. You have a traffic signal there. It's very narrow and it's very dangerous for the pedestrians. Anybody to try to turn in into the parking lot, you'll be blocking and causing serious problems. I'm very concerned about it, and we have the police department, fire department that are creating more traffic, and there will be definitely slowdown and very, very hazardous situation will be created. If, Rick, you know, out of your parking lot, it's very difficult to make a right turn.

They're talking about way down.

How far down? This is not clear. How far down?

Way down.

Okay, that's what that's what my main concern is how close is this property to the main? Intersection pay a street and get a street because it would be very dangerous situation for Access or entering the parking lot. I'm not sure exactly how far is it before Magnolia Street. I Okay, let's take the new building where the police department is and the fire department is. How far down is it past that?

We can ask the applicant to address that in terms of distance to clarify that when they return to the podium here.

I'm not clear how they're going to access this parking lot.

Right. Some of that was covered already in the presentation, but I think we can ask him to go over it again.

Thank you.

So are there others who wish to speak in favor of this application please come forward provide your name your address and your comments. Anyone wishing to speak in opposition if they haven't already to the application, please come to the podium and give us your name and your address and then your comments. I don't see anyone else wishing to speak at this time. So I asked the applicant to address some of the comments and concerns that he's heard and maybe with particular emphasis on the distance for the planned entrance to the intersection.

That is the easy one. So I don't know. Is that unique? Can you zoom all the way out? Because I think we can see the intersection. A lot more history than I do right, I was kind of hired to do the site plan and engineering design and obviously he's spent a lot of time. With improvements sounds like with both the our park and then. piggybacking some of that work with volunteers for the dirt track. Honestly, some of the pictures that you can see in there, it does look like it hasn't been used in a while. And I'm not completely sure how to answer some of the conversations that he obviously has had with the city in terms of what the intended use was. I do know that from my internal meetings regarding the design that there was a lot of different options that were weighed in order to meet the parking demand. Some areas, whether it was the Magnolia lot or this lot, being shared parking and publicly used. I think Rick's also correct in that the west side trail, when it eventually goes through the front of the site, crosses the old railroad bridge, would be also built upon additional railroad land that is actually, I think he was referring to it, on the west side of Geddes Street. And I know that the city is actively negotiating The potential use of that for parking that would be better and more proximate to the public safety. And I mean you did frame it as comments right, so I think the best that I could do is bring that comment forward and make sure that the city engineer in the city planners. know that you know at least rick's opinion is that maybe that. Does need to be secure there's certain things that happen between a police's personal vehicle and their squad vehicle and things they have to transfer in and out of cars and other equipment so it does need to be secure for the time being that it is a Lot that's associated with the public safety facility But perhaps and I don't want to promise it because I know that I can't I But perhaps some of the future plans for that west side of Gettysh Street for continuing that trail and perhaps building some parking for the public safety facility that's more proximate would open the ability to make this more of a shared use parking lot with removing some of the gates and access control. But I can certainly bring his comments back to the city planners and police and fire meetings that I have.

What's the total parking demand for the departments that are moving into the new facility? Do you have that number?

You know, I thought about that when I was walking over here, and I probably could have grabbed it because I do take notes, and I was like, that's probably one thing as I'm talking about all these parking lots. I know because we did the design of the public safety building proper. It was about 139 spaces. There's about 20 being added right behind it. That's a little sliver of land next to Harbor Brook. So that puts you at maybe 150, 160. You know, we have about 72 here. So that gets you just above, you know, 220 or so. And the Magnolia lot is a fairly large piece of property that has to be at least 150. And they also put in a parallel parking, some on-street parking in front of the facility too to try and, add some of that. So it probably is about 300 personnel that come and go from different shifts. And there's obviously redundant vehicles as well because now there's personal vehicles with squad vehicles. So it's a little bit different than just a retail store trying to figure out how many apartments you need to park because those people live there. There's a little bit different demand when you deal with a public safety facility. But it's probably a little over 300, yeah.

Thank you. Other questions?

Yes, please. Just want to run through a scenario with you. We've had other projects where there have been questions about tall fences. And this fence is proposed as eight feet.

Um, it's labeled as eight feet. I think that there is an option to do it at a lesser, it's, I mean, it's not like a barbed wire fence or anything, right? Like if you want to get through the fence, you can get through the fence, you can get over the fence.

What do you think?

It would be a chain link fence. The existing fence that keeps you from falling off the bridge side, which would be the west side, because it's elevated there, is chain link. That would have to be replaced. And then I believe as part of the railroad lease agreement and ongoing negotiations, there's also an existing swedged end chain link fence along the railroad that would be replaced as well. I think obviously the higher fence, the more you can make the facility, but a six-foot fence essentially does the same purpose as an eight-foot fence. And if I can read your comment, maybe it would be a more decorative fence along the roadway or something.

The plan right now is to have this as more of a secure parking lot. Police officers pull in, switch items from personal vehicle to police car, and they're still going to have the lot over on Pete Street. They still have to be moving the cars back and forth, right?

Correct. That sounds right. Yep. Yep.

Sure. Yeah.

OK. Sure. Not every police car, not every employee that works in that building drives a police car. There's a lot of civilians that drive and do office work. They're not police officers. And there's the possibility that just the nine to five office people who do not drive squad cars could easily choose to park here and not need giant security fences and gates and all that. and instead they could put the cars that they need secure, which I completely understand, in the other two large lots that they have. This could either be a public-private relationship. It could be a really good story, or it could be horrible if they take over everything. I want it to end well for everybody.

Well, for everybody, that's a good goal. But I'm not sure that we're able to render a decision based on what the arrangement was or should be or could be in the future between owners, leaseholders, and they.

I think what I was trying to achieve here was just giving you guys some background instead of it just being a cut and dry, quick, and now approval. That's that. There's a little bit more to it, and I think I just wanted you guys to know that.

And I think one of the very important things that happened here was you raised awareness of some of the context involved with this and some of the history that you've experienced in this area. And just as importantly, the applicant's representative heard that and has indicated a willingness to convey those questions, concerns, and issues back to the client, the applicant in this case. As Commissioner Murphy indicated, we can only act upon the applications that come to us. And if there are desires to modify things in the future, those can be made if an application is approved. But we don't get to redesign applications because we have better ideas or different ideas or more creative ideas on how it might work within the context of a particular neighborhood. So our scope is limited to what's on the application, what comes before us. But I think, as I said, you made an important point in outlining some of that history and expectations from previous conversations and meetings with various folks. Okay, I think our public comment is closed. Sir, we just closed the public comment on this one. And now we would turn our attention to our seeker review.

Has everyone had an opportunity to review the EAF Part 1 prepared by the applicant and contained in your packet? Yes. Yes. Has everyone had an opportunity to review the EAF Part 2 prepared by staff and contained in your packet? Yes. Does anyone believe that the proposed action will have a moderate to large impact under SECRA?

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 3 accordingly.

Thank you. Is there a motion for a SECRA action on this application?

Make a motion to issue a negative seeker declaration.

Thank you. Is there a second?

Second.

Thank you. Discussion on this motion for a seeker determination? If not, then all in favor of this motion, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed, please say nay. Any abstentions? Seeker motion carries. We may now proceed to action on the major site plan review itself. This is MASPR 2026-33. Is there a motion at this time for action?

I make a motion to approve MESPR-2026-33 as presented with three conditions. Those conditions are, one, the applicant shall comply with the general conditions for approval of the site plan application. Two, snow storage shall be maintained on site in the designated area and shall not encroach into the public right away. or adjacent properties. And three, the applicant shall obtain an access agreement between 115 South Gettys Street and 900 West Fayette Street for allowing vehicles access to the parking lot from West Fayette Street.

Thank you. Is there a second for that motion?

Second.

Thank you. Discussion on this motion for the major site plan review? If not, then all in favor of this motion before us, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed, please say nay. Any abstentions? That motion carries. Thank you. We move on to our next application.

Next up is another major site plan review, MASPR-2026-18 at 119 Simon Drive. This is in the Commercial Zone District.

Good evening. Vincent Ryan with Keptinger Freeman Associates, 6320 Fly Road, East Syracuse. I'm here tonight with the architect as well, Joe Parano, who could speak to any of the architecture. In terms of the site plan, this is the remaining lot at the Simon Drive development. Lowe's is to the northeast. There's a bank to the west and Golden Corral directly to the north. The intent is this is a three-tenant facility. The first tenant to the west is the dispensary called out in the site plans. The other two tenants are undisclosed at this time, but the intent is to have two drive-throughs, one for the third-most tenant and then one for the dispensary tenant. The intent is on the dispensary for call-in orders. They can pull up to the pickup window and then pull away. They won't be making orders at the window. There are 52 parking spots the building is about 8,000 square feet the snow storage areas that open green space To the right of the building where you see the trees snow can be plowed into there. It also serves as our stormwater facility We've talked with engineering about stormwater this entire site is governed by an overarching sweep so the development here is It does not exceed the previous development approved by this board in terms of stormwater, and everything goes to the west, the existing stormwater facility along Midler. In terms of site, other issues, we've got an entrance off the shared access drive. There's no driveway off Simon directly. And the intent is for as people come in to circulate around the building to the drive-thrus and then exit as needed or park. I know there was a comment about hours of operation. The intent for the dispensary is to be from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m., and they'll have about four employees. So that's about it. Questions?

That was 8 to 8 for the hours of operation? Yes.

And that's daily? Yes.

Thank you.

Questions for the applicant?

Two comments that the transportation planner made. One is there's nine parking spaces for bikes that are required. He indicated that they were on a recent map, but I haven't been able to find them on this map.

Just southwest corner of the building, there's about four spots equating to the eight parking spaces for bikes.

Okay, good, great, great.

The other question I had is the transportation planner mentioned the possibility of an ADA sidewalk from the store to Simon Drive. I thought that was interesting because there's not sidewalks from any of the other entities down there to Simon Drive, and there's no sidewalk on Simon Drive. So I'm just wondering about that comment, if there's any intention to deal with that or –

Sorry, what was the question?

The transportation planner's comment is DPW maintains that an ADA-compliant walkway is needed from the main entrance of the retail structure to Simon Drive Travelway.

This is Nate Pem for Zoning Planner. So Newberg, the transportation planner, explain like his things to me because what he requirement is on the private parcel. So this is not like a strict requirement. He's want to add this like a recommendations. So speaking to me is that like it would be a discussion in the planning commissions. If this can be happened, that's great. But otherwise DPW cannot require, you know, that happened in the private, you know, parcel. It's not, that's not there right away for the CMS drive. Right. Okay, good. I just wanted to check. Thank you.

The intent is no orders at the window because they have to be verified, so they would have to make their order, pull up to the window, and it's strictly for pickup for the left drive-thru. For the cannabis drive-thru, yes.

And the ID will be required for pickup.

It would adhere to state law, yeah.

Is planned for that tenant? Yes. You don't have that tenant? Do not. You don't have the second tenant? No. But you all know that you have to come back to zoning and planning. Yes. To review that, especially that. And my last question is, is there an operator for the cannabis?

Yes. Well, there's one...

So we did supply the certificate, yeah.

It's not a local, it's a brand new certificate.

So, for now, the plan is that would be the operator. I guess I just don't know if there's an operational plan.

Yeah. Yeah. The owner of the building...

Any other questions for the applicant? 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 comments. Anyone wishing to speak in opposition, please come forward to provide your name, address, and comments. No one is rising to speak, so we'll close public comment on this, turn our attention to the secret review.

Before that, the only other thing I'll offer to the board, just to tie this up in Kathy's question, a retail dispensary in the city requires a business certificate of use. Those are not transferable. So although this process, should you move forward and approve it, would approve the land use for the smoking establishment, which is a permitted land use by right, the tenant requires a business certificate of use, right? every two years. So if the tenant were to change, we would get notice from Office of Cannabis Management. It would go through that process. And they'd have to establish their own license and get their own business certificate of use at the local level. I don't know if that helps answer or clarify your question, but... Would that require approval then by the Planning Commission or not? No, because the land use would already be established. It'd just be a change in tenant. So it'd be like going from a McDonald's burger thing or... But you may want to consider adding that as a seventh condition that the smoking establishment, the retail dispensary obtain and maintain a certificate of use.

It's required, but we'd be well advised to include that as an additional condition. I think so.

We've been consistently adding that. I think the cannabis dispensaries are somewhat of a newer requirement. But since we had the licensing in place for retail establishments prior to New York State legalizing retail cannabis sales, we can continue. Do continue to enforce it on all the dispensaries that are in the city limits.

Good suggestion. So we didn't. Okay, secret. Sorry. Thank you. Lost my train of thought.

Has everyone had an opportunity to review the EIF part one prepared by the applicant and containing your packet? Yes. Has everyone had an opportunity to review the EIF part two prepared by staff and containing your packet? Yes. Does anyone believe that the proposed action will have a moderate to large impact under SECRA? 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 3 accordingly. Thank you.

So is there a motion for SECRA action on this application?

I make a motion to issue a negative SECRA declaration.

Thank you. Is there a second?

Second.

Thank you. Discussion on the secret motion before us? 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 secret motion carries. And we are now at a point where we can act upon the major site plan review itself. This is MASPR 2026-18. Is there a motion for action on this?

I make a motion to approve MASPR-2026-18 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. Two, the applicant must ensure appropriate easements are in place for access to public sewer infrastructure and infrastructure via the adjacent parcel prior to issuance of any building permits. Three, snow storage shall be maintained on site in the designated area and shall not encroach into the public right-of-way or adjacent properties. Four, any land use type occupying the ground floor commercial tenant space shall obtain appropriate approvals before commencing operations. Five, the applicant shall comply with the hours of operation as approved by the City Planning Commission during this meeting, which are 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. And six, the owner of the business shall maintain an active certificate of use for the cannabis dispensary.

Thank you. Is there a second?

Second.

Thanks. Discussion on this motion now for the 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 motion carries. Our next application, please. Thank you.

Next up is a presentation within a planned development district, or PDD, for an amendment at 1405 East Genesee Street, owned by Northside Land Holdings, LLC. Applicant is CHA Consulting. This is a PDD, again, and it's multiple companion pieces, and tonight will be presentation only, but I'll turn it over to Brian to introduce it.

Thank you. Good evening. Brian Bouchard with CHA Consulting, 300 South State Street. Project engineer working on behalf of the owner who's also the applicant, Northside Holdings, LLC. You could start with the survey here. That's fine. The property is currently three separate parcels. Project location is the corner of Pine Street and Genesee Street in the northeast corner. It's currently both vacant land and a vacant former retail property. It was a pharmacy or Rite Aid and then a Walgreens along with surface parking facing Pine Street. As Jake mentioned, this is an existing planned development district that was created essentially specific to the retail use at the time. And this is fairly unique in that in order to redevelop the property for anything other than what's there, our application to you is for an amendment to the planned development district. essentially to redevelop it in a way that's somewhat consistent with the streetscape and the corridor. You know, the mixed use developments that are both in and around and in some cases directly adjacent to the project site. And also, as mentioned, I did ask for the opportunity to come here because it's a little bit different than just an entitled use in a site plan and saying, here's what we're doing. So I wanted both the commission to have an opportunity to comment I will say that there are several departments that I don't think have commented yet, so we're not in a position for action anyway. There are also a few comments on Camino that I haven't fully had a chance to respond to yet, and we will collect both all of those comments, commission comments, public comments, and expect to come back to you with a revised application and some answers to any questions that you might have. I think we're also waiting for the 30-day coordinated review period to expire for seeker The seeker coordinated review too. So informational session Getting back to the survey and what we're asking for here So three existing properties all under common ownership the total site acreage of all three properties is just over one acre Interesting fact because I do a lot of research when I'm starting this even though I'm a civil engineer but there's cool things that you kind of see and hear about and And I do get to frequent landmark boards and cool buildings and stuff like that. This site, if you didn't know, obviously originally, probably almost 200 years ago, obviously had several residential houses on it, one of which on the hard corner belonged to Reverend Jermaine Logan and his wife Carolyn. So this was back in 1848. Reverend Logan was an instrumental figure locally. He was a prominent agent of the Underground Railroad, ushering, you know, freedom seekers to safety as they kind of navigated north. Obviously, the northern states and Syracuse in particular was known for being able to seek asylum and also a lot of them moving their way up to Canada as well. So he did own a house here. He also owned several other properties in the city. And there is currently, um, obviously his house has gone now it's since been demolished. I don't know when that was. It could have been a long time ago, but there is a plaque out front. That designates this site as part of the Syracuse is freedom trail. So there's several markers across the city that you can visit. You can Google it online and it gives you some facts, this particular marker. Kind of memorializes the reverend's life and contributions to the local community as a reverend, a pastor, even as kids became doctors, lawyers, and stayed in Syracuse for ages. And the plaque also has some cool quotes from Frederick douglas who apparently frequented the House. And kind of has a story about how he had recalled one night when he was knocking on the door at the House and some of the happenings that happened there so cool piece of history. Obviously, some of that is now gone with the single story brick structure that you see there and our purpose of the application again. is to amend this district for a specific project that kind of falls within ReZone Syracuse. We've met several times actually over the past two years to try and create A VISION FOR THIS PROJECT BECAUSE YOU'LL NOTICE AND I DIDN'T INCLUDE A COPY OF THE ZONING MAP. BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THE ZONING MAP THIS PDD WHICH IS NOT A GREATER DISTRICT IT'S JUST THESE PIECES OF PROPERTY. ARE SURROUNDED ON ALL FOUR SIDES BY DIFFERENT ZONING DISTRICTS. SO ACROSS THE STREET ON GENESEE STREET YOU HAVE OUR FOUR WHICH ARE VERY LARGE. YOU KNOW RENTAL STYLE BUILDINGS TWO TO THREE STORIES THERE YOU GO THANK YOU NATE. DO MY HOMEWORK FOR ME SO. This essentially exists at a crossroad of four different zoning districts. So you have our four across the street where there's these large rental properties up on the hill directly to the East is MX1, so there's some two-story houses, there's a community center, and then there's some R5 at the corner of Beach Street. Directly across the street to the west, across Pine Street, is a project that we presented to you that's now under construction called the Rosie Apartment Building. That was actually permitted under the old zoning, but it's very consistent with the MX2 district that it's been put in. And then directly behind it, even the properties that are touching us, are actually MX4. There's kind of two perspectives here, you know developer running to build sort of maximize the site would say extend me the mx for district right. mx for allows for eight or nine story buildings and some higher lot coverages but that's kind of unfair to the streetscape. And then also the other side of the coin, where you have things like the the our district or some things that are more restrict restrictive essentially not. being able to create a financially viable project. So we looked at all of the different zoning districts and what mechanism could be used to redevelop this site. And it's either some type of use or variance, or it's changing the zoning to something that could be amenable either to the city or the applicant, or just creating the project that kind of captures each one of the important points from the adjacent district and amending the PDD. And that's essentially the application that we've submitted. So in no way is it a purely squared zone change to one of the other districts because we would have captured that. There's things that are beneficial and some things that are not to each one of those instances. So what we've created for you is a list of documents that are slightly different than a typical site plan. We've prepared the amended district plan, which is essentially a narrative that memorializes sort of the existing conditions of the site and kind of reasoning behind the proposed change and describes the change. but essentially ends with the development requirements that would be the zoning limitations for this property, just like a typical zoning district. It's just a very specific set of rules for the zoning district itself. And then obviously we have the application forms and we've attached to this all the documents that you're typically seeing with site plans and architecture and renderings and the re-subdivision. So that's the documents that you have. And kind of a summary of like the history and reasoning behind why we're here and part of the discussion, just so you can frame the process. The bulk regulations that we have asked for, which are up on the screen, so I'll just point them out. uses so we have to write this in a way that still honors the existing zoning so like a one-story retail building could still exist there today right should he not get financing or something the existing use is still self-sustaining the changes that we're making would be to allow for a mixed-use primarily residential multifamily project with the mixed income components so essentially this creates like an MX project right where it would have residential apartment units and and some ground floor retail to complement the business corridor that's here. A lot of the other bulk regulations are kind of a mix between the MXs. So we're proposing setbacks that would build up to the street line that would match the houses and the Rosie project that kind of forms the streetscape along Genesee Street now, which is a very wide right-of-way and corridor for the pedestrian realm. So building up to the property line is not an issue on the street frontages. And it is a corner lot, so we're proposing 10 feet of building setback on both of the private properties. So both side yards would be 10 feet. Building height, it's not that we want no maximum. The height is guided by the number of stories because there's different ceiling heights in different buildings. So the number of stories would, again, be guided by one-story minimum, which is essentially the pre-existing use, and then up to a six-story maximum. And I'd like to show you some pictures when we get into the, architectural design because there were some concessions made there. It could be described as a six-story building because it has a submerged basement that's very similar to the Rosie across the street. But we would make, you know, essentially no changes to lot size coverage. We'd uphold the same parking requirements that are required by the city and still provide the requirement for the certified affordable units for any residential uses that would be permitted. So you could just pull up the site plan I think I'll just show you what the proposed footprint would be now that we've seen the survey. So the building would be positioned along the street. Just the site plan would be good once you get to it. And then the required setbacks along both the east and north property lines. As this is loading, the area that's on the, okay, so this is good, yeah. Yeah, that's fine, because we can kind of see the green space in courtyards. The area that's on the hard corner facing Genesee and pine would be reserved for commercial tenant So the mixed-use component there we did put in 1500 square feet I believe of minimum area this area that we're showing is about 2200 feet and this could be for some type of retail or office or commercial tenant within the mixed-use project We would also be closing all the driveways that are along Genesee Street That's a heavily traveled road same thing that we did with the Rosie project so closing all of those curb cuts for vehicular access. And the parking in this case would be accommodated within the building. So we would actually move, there's an existing driveway there, we would move that driveway down to align with the ingress and egress to the parking garage that does discharge at grade here because of the terrain that slopes down Pine Street. But it's actually a basement level parking garage throughout most of the building. You could see along genesee street a lot of focus with city planning on creating a street scape that's pedestrian friendly here. This is very similar to the courtyards and other things that we accommodated at the Rosie project where you'd have. The pedestrian entrance to the to the lobby to get you to the residential units that are all on the remainder of the first floor and upper floors. There's also these kind of three modules of the building, which are double-loaded corridors, and the space in between them would be outdoor courtyard space that essentially faces the street. It is enclosed on the right-hand side, but that is kind of a pass-through that you'd be able to walk out, so there is a pedestrian connection on the, you know, it's an opening on the first floor, and then the second floor is more of a bridge for some amenity space on it. So the retail... On the corner, the residential lobby in the center of the building, and then the remainder of the first floor being residential units with the upper floors residential as well. We don't have to stop at all the floor plans, but if you can get to the floor plans and then some of the pictures, I'll describe the building. In total, we have 246 dwelling units. This is really a primary mix of studios and ones. There are several two bedrooms, and there's only a handful of three bedrooms, which are kind of like the corner spaces and things. So 246 dwelling units. The building, if we could stop at one of the pictures, as I was describing, we did put in six stories because if you were looking from the north at the backside of the building, which is the MX4 side, it would appear to be six stories. The basement level drives in and out, but when you face Genesee Street, The sidewalk is at the first level and it's five stories tall facing genesee street, which is very similar to the Rosie that's that's across the street. And one of the things that we did in planning this in order to sort of start to break down the mass and scale of the building, because it is at this intersection was to take that first or take the upper level essentially off of the. the street facing facade. So you see four stories of residential units, and then there's a small rooftops terrace where we've stepped the building back along Genesee Street, which you can kind of see right here. You can see the upper level terrace. This kind of paints the picture of the three different kind of modules of the building and breaking it up vertically with different building materials, which are a mix of stone and fiber cement siding and metal trims. So you can kind of see how we've taken the same theme of the rosy building and added some vertical elements to kind of break up the monotony of a front facade. All the storefront windows and pedestrian items that are facing Genesee Street are helpful to the streetscape there as well. And then lastly, I think we had, did we just add, or is this the last one of the renderings? I know we had one with building materials. So these are kind of all the pictures of the different spaces. So you have the pedestrian space there. This is looking down Genesee Street and then the two-dimensional elevations that kind of give you the height and some of those breakouts and bump-ins of the building that was purposeful to create a four-story building from the street that steps back to a five-story building and then the six-story is really only at the back facing the MX4 zoning district. So for informational purposes only, hopefully you do have a little bit of feedback or questions or comments and or public comments that we can start to engage with and collect for our resubmission and submitting the final drawings to the zoning office.

Great overview. Thank you. Questions on this concept?

I'm just wondering about the PDD designation. Again, if I understand, as you described it, the reason why you want to just continue the PDD is because if you turn it into an MX, it doesn't allow you to do all the things you want to do with setbacks, et cetera.

Is that? That is exactly correct. The closest one would truly be MX2. Right. which you would think we could build the same project that the Rosie was. The problem is the Rosie is a slightly larger footprint that exists on a larger piece of land. And MX2 does restrict the number of floors based on a parcel size, and we're not there. I think it's 75,000 square feet, and we're at 50,000 square feet. So that was one trigger to say, okay, we can't really just make the MX2 work. And then obviously some of the lesser ones you get into really, you know, two or three story buildings. And then self-serving as a developer, you're like, well, let's use MX4, but that's really meant to be behind Genesee Street, where really right next to us, where you have that six-story exposed north facade, right next to that could be a nine-story building. So it was trying to find the medium between all of them, and it took a lot of time. We've designed this building probably three or four times and met with Jake's team and Owen and the zoning staff to try and figure out What the best solution would be to make sure we could redevelop the project site?

Yeah, good the other question has just regarding the comments of the Preservation planner which you've already asked to a bit, but she was asking for formal archaeological study. Yes, and Not sure that's necessary. I'm just wondering you know conversations. You're having with with the preservation planner where we are in that particular process and

Yes, I haven't had a chance to talk to her yet so she obviously sees the application for what was submitted right since she has. So i've done two things one in starting the project before we even submitted anything I had the client solicit a proposal from powers and tyranny archaeology. uh... to get a scope and fee so that was pre-planned that it wasn't a surprise to perform those those studies there's a phase one a archaeological study which is essentially a desktop study that would review historical research to figure out whether or not there is cultural significance to a project site uh... the next that she's referring to is a phase one b which is usually only triggered if you do find out that there was something historical or culturally significant at the site based on a desktop analysis, you would then send the archeology team out to perform shovel samples to find things. A lot of times this is history that may have even happened before 200 years ago, 500 years ago, where you're trying to find on undisturbed ground, things like arrowheads or artifacts and they sift through the dirt. And if they do find something, then you can get into a more elaborate archeological study. Since the time that we submitted our, land disturbance permit requires SHPO's approval. So we at the same time submit to the city, we submit to the State Historic Preservation Office. I was expecting something similar to Kate's comments. However, they did reply with a letter that I can provide for the record. that says that they've reviewed the project and find that there would be no significant adverse impacts associated with the redevelopment of this project based on the project plans that we submitted. Why did they say that? Number one is because I think this is more of a person that is a local significance because of what he did and not necessarily where he lived or the color of his wallpaper or the color of the house that used to be there, right? Um, it's him as a person that needs to be memorialized by way of the plaque and the freedom trail and all the research that you find online. And I think if you did a phase one, a, you would end up finding out that this was the former home of the Reverend and, um, you know, and then if you advance it to an archeological survey, they're digging 12 inch holes in the ground. It's been so disturbed that I'm not sure that there would be any. artifacts it'd be really cool to find his tin cup or his bulk or you know his cap or something like that but i'm not sure that you would find it there right um so i still need to run this to ground with kate i'll share the shippo letter with you or with you and with kate to see if she still wants to pursue this um obviously as an applicant we're willing to do it there's an expense to it i'm just not sure that there's also value to it and i don't know if that makes sense how i described it i did a very similar project across from fort stanwick in Rome, which is a very prominent historical site, Native Americans and all the other stuff that happened there. And it was very similar. It was so disturbed, but there had been evidence of Native American burials and things in the street when they were digging sewers up in the past. And the solution there was it's disturbed. They've ripped a building down. There's nothing within the top. But when we go to dig our new foundation for a, it was a dental office, they simply just hired the archaeologist to stand out there and watch the excavation. And in this case, maybe that's appropriate, too, you know, in case there is something abnormal about the dirt that you're seeing or you find a remnants of the foundation or something like that. That's probably way too much for you, but I will run this to ground and I think we can either solve it by. assuming that it's historical because of the person and not the place. But if there is something else we need to do, we can accommodate that. Okay, good. Thanks. That's good. I appreciate the detailed explanation.

It just comes to my mind with what's been going on with the infrastructure work on Erie Boulevard. You were there and covered all these privies where there was a lot of good stuff there.

Yeah. I'm sure there's a privy there. There's got to be somewhere, right? You wouldn't want to dig in it way long ago, but now it's not too bad. Thanks, Brian.

Additional questions? I'm good. Sure.

On the part one, you answered several questions. Yeah.

Yeah.

Yeah, a lot of those revolve around things like the use of pesticides at, for instance, like a commercially operational like golf course and some of those things. And I certainly as you're saying it, I'm like, I probably should answer it differently because there's a very small component to the building that is retail. But all of the call it potential impacts when you're looking at like the sewer usage, the water usage, the trash hauler, I think is one of the comments and then pesticide usage. Primarily that's all coming from the residential use 246 dwelling units and not so much the office space or retail space I'm willing to go either way if staff wants me to update it I can I think part of the reason why it asks that way in the seeker form is because things like energy uses for or electricity usage for apartment buildings is inherent and versus if you had a commercial use, it could be significantly different, whether it's a data center or an ice cream shop, right? So some of those aren't required to be answered if it's not a residential, primarily a residential apartment project. But if I do need to make a statement, I mean, we don't have a tenant, so I can't really figure out if it's a restaurant or an office, the waste would be a little bit different, but it's probably nominal compared to the overall scale of the building in terms of the... Waste generated would be primarily the residential units and not the office, right?

So I guess I'll leave it to staff. But the question would be, is the building of 250 units a commercial project? I'll leave that to you guys to figure out.

Sure.

Understood. Thank you.

I have another question on the amenity space. There's no discussion yet about what the amenities are inside the building.

Has there been thought to that yet? So I can tell you that on the outside of the building in the courtyard spaces, it would be very similar to what we've done at COTA has a very similar courtyard and also theory Syracuse theory has like a pool and stuff. There's a little bit more things going on there, but the, The outside amenities that I'm designing would be patio pavers and turf grass and other things just to enjoy the outside, right? The amenity areas inside are probably still being developed, but I can definitely answer that question for you. I don't want to make it up, but the things that the market demands are some of those amenity spaces would simply be a quiet room, a study area, or someplace where you can go have your in-laws over and go hang out for a minute without sitting on your studio bed, right? Certainly going to be things like fitness, and then sometimes there's crazy things like a gaming room or some other activity areas, but I can, when we resubmit, provide for the record what the list of amenities would be, and there's various spaces on different floors, so there's plenty of room in the building to accommodate all of them, but we'll make a list of that for you.

One other note for the board, just for the commission from commissioner Lentz's question. Brian's correct. Essentially, if we were to, you know, build this out in Sims world or, you know, an unbuilt land probably would have been zoned MX two, but it's not, it is a PDD through corporation council has been identified that, uh, you know, uh, acceptable and legal pathway forward to amend it is okay as long as they maintain and have some retail establishment, which Brian states they don't know what tenant, but quickly like initially our evaluation would be this would essentially comply with everything in mx2 uh other than the bonus story um given due to the size of the lot so they wouldn't qualify for that but everything else would comply in getting that with on-site parking uh being provided so just uh to keep that in mind but um and then the agreement that some form of commercial retail be established and maintained within the structure to maintain the PDD, which is what that was created for initially. So some might say like maybe that's not a perfect world, but that's what we're dealt with here as a board, as a staff, as an applicant, like it is a PDD, like that's the fact. So following the framework on how you amend a PDD within that spirit is what they're attempting to do, but it is very close to being fully compliant with MX2, which is what the ROSI is to the West. Right. Okay. Thanks.

Additional questions?

Yeah. I'm sorry.

Does anybody else have a question?

No, I'm just asking if there are more. Go ahead.

Okay, yeah. Could you talk a little bit about the mix of rooms that you've chosen? The reason I'm curious, you know, there's a lot of conversation now where we're getting, you know, a lot of studios in one bedrooms and two bedrooms in the pipeline, but three bedrooms or more is still a problem. So I'm just wondering how you come up with that particular mix and if you considered the possibility of more, you know, three bedroom units.

The market demands smaller units. I don't know, or it's not smaller units. The market demands people living by themselves, essentially studios and ones. We've done several projects. There's only a handful that catered to larger bedrooms. I mean, four and five beds. We've done projects outside of New York State that are five or six beds, you know? And that really becomes communal living, right? You can't really have, unrelated people living in essentially a dorm room. And to the benefit of these projects, they do exist far enough away from the university where you can get young professionals and people that maybe just graduated that are still working in and around. So the building itself is more flexible in terms of being able to lease it up if it has a stronger unit count of studios and ones. versus, you know, I don't think anybody's really doing four or five beds. The reason there's three beds is because it's kind of the wasted space that's in the corners of the building. Um, and then obviously having twos where you can have either a couple or partners or, or whatever it might be, but this is kind of driven by the market demand. And I don't know if that was COVID where nobody wants to live together anymore or whatever, but, um, you know, a lot of them that you've seen crown Plaza is very efficient, you know, studio apartments.

Right.

Um, Some of the newer ones that we've done are very heavily Studios and ones and twos and not really a lot of the larger ones anymore, right?

Yeah, understood So I'm just thinking in terms of you know family that will go in three bedrooms and for affordable housing That's where we seem to be lacking in terms of the units. I understand. Okay.

Thank you Thank you So this isn't a formal hearing. It was an informational session in good exchange, but I think you were looking for public comment. So let me extend the offer to anyone who's left. If anyone would like to speak in favor of the concept that was just presented, please come forward and share your thoughts. Likewise, if anyone would like to speak in opposition to the concept just presented. Please come forward and share your views. Okay, you're not gonna get a lot of public input tonight. You'll have to wait, I guess, for the formal public hearing, but we appreciate the overview and the responses to the various questions to help us understand more clearly what will be on our agenda in the not too distant future. Okay, thank you. Moving on.

I was also just updated that the resub division for Emerson, that applicant will not make it tonight. and they're not here, so we'll work to get that on a future agenda. And then last tonight, under other business, we just have a three-mile limit subdivision review at 5839 Bowman Road. The city engineer has approved this three-mile limit. Town of Manlius, right? That's correct.

Is there a motion for action on the three-mile limit in Manlius? Yes.

Make a motion to approve 3S-2026-10 as presented. Thank you. Is there a second? Second.

Thank you. Discussion on the three mile limit motion. If not, all in favor, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed, please say nay. Any abstentions? 3S-2026-10 is approved. Is there anything else to come before us tonight?

Not tight.

Back in three weeks. In that case, a motion to adjourn would be in order.

So moved.

Second? Second. Second. Chris, discussion? All in favor, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed, say nay. We are adjourned until the third week of July. Thank you.