City Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening and welcome to this meeting of the Syracuse Planning Commission. We'll begin our public hearings momentarily. First we will take action on the minutes of our previous meeting which was July 20th. Those minutes have been distributed in draft form to the members of the Commission. It'd be appropriate at this time for a motion for action on those minutes from July 20th. Is there such a motion?

I move approval of the minutes of July 20th, 2026.

Thank you. A second?

I'll second.

Thank you. Discussion on the motion before us for the minutes? If not, all in favor, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed, please say nay. Any abstentions? And I'm in the abstaining category because I was unable to attend the last meeting. So those minutes are approved as distributed. As we move into the hearings for tonight, just a word of guidance for those who might be unfamiliar with our process. As each application is announced, we ask that the applicant or the representative come to the podium in the center of the room. provide your name and address for the record, and then a brief summary of what's involved with your application. Following any questions from the Commission members, we will then open the floor for members of the public who wish to speak in favor of that application, and then another 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 to address the comments made in opposition. We ask that everyone keep their comments either for or against approximately three minutes so that everyone who wishes to speak has an opportunity to do that and so that we can conclude the meeting before we have to exit the room because of security reasons when the place closes for the evening. So with that, I do want to ask, I think there's an update to the agenda. Jay, could you give us the latest on what may not be acted upon this evening?

Yes. First, we have an old business item that was withdrawn by the applicant. This was a resubdivision R-2026-37 at 416 and 400 North Monticello Ave. This was on a recent meeting. rather than coming back, it's just been withdrawn. So they would have to resubmit a new application if this were to come back. The second is under new business item. It's a special use permit SP-2026-42 at 2910 Erie Boulevard East. We are still pending OCPB review and comment. So we expect to have that on possibly at the next meeting. So anybody here for those two, apologies, those two will not be heard tonight. That's it.

Okay, and notification will go out if they should return in similar fashion to what was presented by way of notification for this evening's meeting. So stay tuned. So with that, we first have some old business to deal with. Could you give us the introduction for the moratorium item?

Yes, not only are we so the Council recently approved an extension of the battery energy storage moratorium. What we are seeking going through tonight is a discussion about amending the language and it's up on the screen. It's also in your packets, but. The previous moratorium, before we extended it, excluded regulating what I would just call residential battery energy storage systems at 80 kilowatt hours or less. We did not have an equivalent exception for commercial buildings. These are not connected to the grid. Think a generator connected to a commercial building. Those are still covered in the moratorium, so those can't move forward. That is not our legislative intent behind The future local law that we're working on to regulate those so we are seeking to add language to add that exception to allow for a commercial building with under 600 kilowatt hour device to move forward with normal permitting and zoning review, so they're not they're still subject to review, but they would not be captured by the moratorium language any longer.

Thank you. Any questions for Jake on the rationale behind this?

Just out of curiosity, Jake, are there any queued up that are waiting for consideration?

Yes. There is a building that's pending a grant, actually, too. But this would, you know, it's not just for that. This would open it up for anybody who's wishing to make one of these installations on a commercial building, which, as you can see in the definitions, it's anything other than a one or two family or townhome in a residential zone district. So commercial is really more broad than what most people think.

Thanks. Any other clarification or questions?

I just have one comment, Jake, that I would ask that staff include a review of the town of Clay's recent legislation, well, ordinance that was passed for battery storage regulations and do a comparative to what we will propose, being that they are very similar in requirement.

Understood. We've definitely looked at it, among others. It's been a coordinated city effort, kind of co-led by Deputy Commissioner of Planning and Sustainability, Owen Kearney. A bunch of us are involved with that from multiple departments, but we'll be sure. We have done that. Thank you. All set. Thank you.

The extension? I'll make a motion for the extension.

Second.

Discussion on this motion so could we just clarify this is this is a recommendation to the Common Council for approval recommendation for action Moratorium was established by the council.

I believe on recommendation this body originally and This will go as a recommendation as well. Yes Any further questions or comment If not, all in favor of this motion, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed, please say nay. Any abstentions? That is approved. It will move to the Common Council for final action. We have another time extension. Next.

Yes, next is a third time extension for 710 Van Rensselaer Street project with core development. This is under an old project number, it's SR-23-13. This is in the MX4 zone district.

If we can hear, if you could write an overview, please.

Good evening, I am Kate Johnson here on behalf of Cor Van Ransleer Street Company 4. As most of you know, we have been working on this project. It's a 62 unit senior affordable project down at the Inner Harbor. It does front on the water and we are requesting the extension because this is largely funded through 9% tax credit through HCR. and it's an annual cycle. You can only apply once a year. We've applied once and we were denied due to the fact that one of our funding sources didn't come through. So with that funding gap, we were denied. We didn't apply last year because we were unable to solve the funding gap. This year we're gonna apply again. It's September 10th is the due date. We would be awarded in March and construction could start next summer. But the point here is the city has increased its funding as the county has as well. And New York State has increased the, in the program they just announced, they've increased the amounts awarded per unit. So we believe we've closed the funding gap this time and we have a really good chance of being awarded this year. So we're seeking a one-year extension. If we are awarded, we'd start next summer. But, again, I'd be back here because the construction is going to take 18 months to two years. So it'll be an annual thing for a couple of years if we're awarded. Thank you. Any questions? Questions for the applicant?

So the new extension date would be September 18, 2027. Is that correct?

Correct.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Appreciate your time. Certainly. We don't typically ask public comment on time extensions.

Do we need to do that?

I don't believe so. The project's been approved already and it's simple time extension. So in that case, is there a motion for action on this requested time extension through September 2027?

I move to approve a time extension for application SR-23-13 with the same six conditions in the original September 18th, 2023 resolution and with a new expiration date of September 18th, 2027. Thank you.

Is there a second?

Second.

Discussion on this item for time extension? If not, all in favor, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Those opposed, please say nay. Any abstentions? I'm extension is approved. Thank you. We'll see you next year. Most likely our next old business item.

Next up is the East Adams street redevelopment. It includes the major site plan review and seeker for phase three through 12. So this at the last meeting, you guys went through this with Brody and I believe somebody else is here from bond, Kathy representing. So, We can go through the project, clarifying last questions. We're not going to go through everything in depth like last time in hopes to complete the seeker process and vote and make a decision on the major site plan review.

That's good. And you are here to give us the update.

Good evening. My name is Andrew Vanner with Ashton McGrath Architects, a local architect here in downtown. I'll be representing the applicant developer tonight for this project as a project manager.

How's everyone doing?

All right. So where do you want us? Where should we start? Where did we leave off at the last meeting?

We have to do seeker before we can do anything else. Yeah, correct. We have to do seeker before we can make any decisions, so that has to come first. So I guess if there's any questions, comments, anything about that can be brought up now.

And the commission members received seeker information in advance of this meeting. There may be questions regarding that material, and if so, we've got a couple people here that can help us with those questions. Are there questions regarding the Seeker Review?

I don't have any new questions.

No, no new questions.

The old questions have been unanswered. All the old questions have been answered, to my satisfaction at least.

I just want to confirm with Kathleen that everything that was discussed at our last meeting was incorporated into the resolution before us tonight for seeker negative declaration.

Yes, so the documents that were provided were revised part two of the full EAF revised based on the discussion and comments received at the last meeting. You've also received a document that's entitled reasons supporting determination of significance and that would be attached to part three the full EAF and that again was prepared based on the discussion that the Commission had at its last meeting and addresses each of the 20 categories that you talked about in part two and then the third document that was supplied was a proposed resolution for the purpose of issuing a negative declaration meaning that you believe that that there are no significant adverse impacts that require further study. They've either been addressed or they don't exist, and therefore a negative declaration would be appropriate for the project.

Great. Thank you, Kathleen.

So perhaps I should say, since I did raise a question last time in a secret discussion about the archaeological resources, and there was a reference to Central Tech School, high school, and I was wondering if it was a right reference or not, because it is a STEAM school now. In fact, it is Central Tech High School, which is a name that was referred to, the historical name for the STEAM school, and that is appropriate and proper. So I just wanted to clarify that to make sure. It's been so many names over the years.

Further questions for Seeker?

Also, thank you.

So if those issues have been covered, questions answered satisfactorily, materials updated based on last meeting's discussion, I think we are in a position to entertain a motion for the seeker action on this project. Is there a motion? I make a motion to issue a negative seeker declaration.

Second.

You vote. Discussion on the motion? If there's no discussion, all in favor, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed, please say nay. Any abstentions? So the secret motion carries. And we may now move on to our review for the major site plan. Again, based on discussions at the last meeting, any notable updates or changes from the plans originally presented?

I believe everything has been put in front of you through additional correspondence and addressing city comments as they come in through the portal.

And are there any questions from the commission members then?

Yes, I just wanted to follow up on one of the questions I asked last time with respect to the 22,000 square foot for a supermarket. And in that discussion, it seemed to me the commitment was to do a full-service supermarket, but it sounded as if the plan would be for that would be in phase 12, and it's not clear to me that phase is going forward necessarily or the land has been acquired. So if phase 12 doesn't go through, will there still be a full-service supermarket somewhere in the footprint?

Unfortunately, that's probably a question I can't answer beyond the scope of this project.

I guess it's a question we can't answer tonight. I'm sorry.

Repeat that.

Good evening, everyone. Just speaking up. So currently, grocery store is anticipated for phase 12. If that doesn't happen, the administration is committed to exploring additional sites throughout the neighborhood where we might be able to have some partnerships to bring that goal to life.

Great.

Thank you. Absolutely. Good clarification, thank you. Other questions regarding the site plan review?

All set, thanks. All set, thank you.

Okay, questions have been answered. We are in a position to entertain a motion for action on the site plan review for this project. Is there such a motion?

I move to approve application MESRP-26-28 as presented with nine conditions. The nine conditions are as follows. 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 areas and shall not approach into the public right-of-way or adjacent properties. Three, affordable dwelling units must comply with the city income and rent restrictions regardless of a change in building or property ownership. Four, all affordable units will have the same structural fixtures, appliances, and materials as market rate apartments. Five, all affordable dwelling units must be certified by the city's Department of Neighborhood and Business Development administrative procedures. Six, the affordability requirement shall be effective for 30 years from the date of the certificate the occupancy is issued or any other time constraints and funding sources. Seven, any land use type occupying the ground floor commercial tenant spaces in the third use buildings A and B shall obtain approvals, appropriate approvals before commencing operation. Eight, the applicant shall coordinate with the Onondaga County Department of Water and Environmental Protection for any infrastructure-related disturbances of land within the county easement and include county-owned infrastructure must be on the related plans. And nine, the demolition and construction activities shall be conducted in accordance with the proposed noise and dust control mitigation plan. Those are the conditions.

Thank you. Is there a second to that motion?

Second.

Thank you. Discussion? If there is no discussion, then all in favor of this motion, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. As opposed, please say nay. Any abstentions? Site plan review is approved for MASPR 2026-28. Thank you both very much. Thank you. Have a good evening. Thank you. You too. And we move now to new business.

Yes, first up is a resubdivision R-2026-56 at 2126-28 South Ave and 2130 South Ave. Owners the Greater Syracuse Property Development Corporation. This is in the R3 zone district. Kaitlin?

Good evening. I'm Caitlin Wright from the Greater Syracuse Property Development Corporation at 1941 South Salina Street. Before we get into the specifics of this, I just do want to follow up and let the commission know that we had a really productive meeting with the neighbors on Monticello after the last meeting three weeks ago. And while that resub was withdrawn, we do plan on coming back. There'll just need to be a slight modification to the resub division map. So thank you. This property is combining two lots at the corner of Hutchinson and South Ave. The new address would be 100 Hutchinson Ave. We're planning to build a approximately 1,500 square foot single story house here with three bedrooms, two baths, and a detached one car garage. We haven't finalized the site plan yet, but once we do, it'll go through the site plan review process.

Questions for the applicant?

I'm curious, Caitlin, on the survey map on page 165, the dotted line, there's a fence there, that's the current property line?

The dashed line that runs through, there is no fence there, but that is currently the property line. The lines that are fences are a solid line with an X along it.

Great, good, thanks. I couldn't tell exactly what that was referring to. The other question I had just about this property, because with the resale, it's a good-sized lot that would actually be available for a two-unit building. So I'm just curious what you're thinking about that.

For topography reasons. The portion that faces South Ave is pretty steeply sloped, and you can kind of see there's a gap in the fence along the Hutchinson side that looks like it was historically a driveway. So you come up a slight slope to a level section, and the level part of that lot... There's only enough room for one house.

Okay, good. Thanks. Great. I was curious about what that gap meant. Yep. Thanks.

So the new construction will front on South Ave or?

The address will be 100 Hutchinson. I'm not exactly sure what the site plan will look like, but I would think we will probably have the house facing Hutchinson.

Thank you. Further questions?

Thank you.

Thank you. Are there individuals who would like to speak in favor of this application? If so, please come to the podium, provide your name, address, and comments. Anyone wishing to speak in opposition to the application, please come forward. We don't appear to have any speakers for this application. We'll close public comment and turn our attention to the Seeker Review.

Has everyone had an opportunity to review the EAF Part 1 prepared by the applicant and contained in your packet? 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 seeker action on this resubdivision?

Make motion to issue a negative seeker declaration.

Thank you. Is there a second? Second. Thank you. Discussion on the seeker motion for the resubdivision on South Ave. If there's no discussion, then all in favor of this motion for seeker review, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed, please say nay. Any abstentions? The secret motion carries. And we may now consider a motion for action on the actual resubdivision itself, R2656. Is there such a motion?

I move to approve application R-2026-56 as presented with one condition, that condition being the application shall file the resubdivision map in the Onondaga County Clerk's Office within 62 days of approval.

Thank you. Is there a second?

Second.

Thank you. Discussion on this motion? If not, all in favor, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed, please say nay. Any abstentions? Motion carries for R2026-56. Our next new business item, please.

Another resubdivision, R-2026-64. at 107 McAllister and 109 McAllister Ave. This is in the R2 Zone District. Owners Jamila and Jordan Damiani.

Yes, hi, I'm Jamila Damiani.

I'm Jordan Damiani.

And we live currently at 109 McAllister Avenue. We also purchased 107 McAllister Avenue and it's sitting as a vacant lot right now. We're proposing to merge the two lots after three years of consideration. We find it in our best interest to develop the side lot into a driveway and parking pad because we do have a duplex. So considering that on the right side, we have an easement to that driveway, it's still in our best interest to use our own land to do it.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

Questions for the applicants?

All set, thank you.

Yeah, I'm curious on the survey, which is on page 187. I guess that map is okay, too. It looks like there's a curb cut on the far left-hand side. Is that where you're going to put the new driveway in?

Absolutely. We don't intend on changing anything that the city has already in place. It makes it kind of easier for us.

Right, right. Okay, good, because I couldn't tell if that's your intention. Great, thanks.

Any additional questions? Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Are there individuals who would like to speak in favor of this application? If so, please come to the podium. Is there anyone who wishes to speak in opposition to the application? Please come forward. We have no additional speakers, so we will close public comment on this application and turn our attention to the environmental review.

Has everyone had an opportunity to review the EAF Part 1 prepared by the applicant and contained in your packet? 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 seeker action on this resubdivision application? I make a motion to issue a negative seeker declaration. Second. Thank you both. Discussion on the seeker motion. If not, all in favor of this motion, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed, please say nay. Any abstentions? Seeker motion passes, and we can now act upon the resubdivision itself. Is there a motion for action on R2026-64?

Make a motion to approve application R-2026-64 as presented with two conditions. Those two conditions are as following. The applicant shall successfully file the resubdivision map of R-2026-64 in the Onondagi Clerk's Office within 62 days of resubdivision approval. And two, the applicant shall apply for all applicable permits for site improvements from the Central Permit Office.

Thank you. Is there a second to that?

I'll second.

Thank you. Discussion on this motion now for the resubdivision on McAllister. If there's no discussion, all in favor of this motion, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed, please say nay. Any abstentions? That resubdivision is approved. Thank you. Thank you. We move on further into our new business items.

Next up, Special Use Permit SP-2026-41 at 2000 Park Street in the MX3 Zone District. Owner applicant, Ali Ismail. Good afternoon, everybody.

Good afternoon, Ali Ismail. Can someone give us an overview or a summary of the... We had somebody to represent us, but he didn't show up because he's back home. And we came here because we had been approved twice for this project. Since 2019, we tried to open it to make a restaurant, and we've never been denied just because...

We have the gates, you know the safety for the glass doors and They told us we had to have a hearing to get it from I Think what he's trying to say is They thought they maybe could move forward just permitting but weren't aware that they needed the land use approval through the planning board first, so Since it is subject to a special use permit. They're appearing before the board today. Maybe you could walk them through what the restaurant proposal is for the tenant.

Just vegetarian food that's going to be there. That's all we've been trying to do it since 2019.

So that's all we're trying to do there.

We were approved. We just fall short on time. We couldn't finish it on time. And the time expires, so we have to come back again here. So everything is the same. We're not changing anything. We're not doing anything. And the reason we put these metal gates is because they were breaking them all the time. So they break them like three times. And we had to repair them, and it cost us a lot of money. So we decided to put them. And the company we hired, we told them, do we need any approval, any permit? They told us no. So after it was installed, we called for the final inspection. And the inspector told us, why you guys have these gates? And he told me, I need to go back. building a permit office to get permit for the gates. When we went back, they told us the application is expired and we have to do it all over again and come back in. So we're not changing any drawings or anything.

And also a slide up. You could slide it up always, the gates. Does it stay the same?

Are there questions for the applicant about this? special use permit.

A couple of questions. Some of them may actually be for staff rather than the applicant, but I just want to confirm, so your proposed hours of operation are 11 a.m. to 11 p.m. seven days a week, is that correct? That's correct. Okay, thank you. And I was just wondering, The lot coverage is non-conforming. It's 100% and should be no more than 95%. I'm wondering if there is a need to do some landscaping around the right-of-way, et cetera. Would that qualify as taking care of this particular issue? Because it's not clear to me from the rendering.

It wouldn't because that area is actually within the city right-of-way, so it's not on their parcel. I see.

Okay, so it still will be non-conforming. There's no requirement for them to bring it into conformity to do any landscaping.

Yeah, based on the proposal, they were at 100%, and they're remaining at 100%. Right. Okay.

Additional questions?

Who's going to be operating the restaurant?

Both of us.

Yes.

Together.

Is it eat-in only, or is there a takeout?

It's mostly going to be takeout. There is some dining, too. Okay.

The recycling and trash receptacles currently are on the site, but without any screening. Those would need to be screened.

Yes, correct.

Correct. So if this progresses to a... approval action maybe one of the conditions might be to include screening for the trash receptacle and the recycling receptacle that are on site are there additional questions about the operation of this restaurant or the special use permit itself I guess not, so thank you. Thank you so much. And we'll see if the members of the public wish to comment on this. 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 and address and comments.

Good evening. I'm Common Councilor Marino Nave, address 233 East Washington Street, room 314. As district councilor, this spot here at one time was a Texas gas station, and it's been vacant for a long time. So it's an eyesore when something like this is vacant. And I do commend you for bringing a restaurant in. One question was not asked was that are you going to serve alcohol? Okay, so you won't be serving alcohol, okay. And you're concerned about the intersection, Hiawatha Boulevard and Park Street. There is congestion during the day, especially on the weekends, utilization of the regional market, NBT Bank Stadium, the transportation center. So I'm most concerned about traffic getting in and out. And again, like we were talking before, to having a place, a dumpster to put everything. So you are close to other places, a low market, you're by Wendy's and regional market. So I think this is a good proposal and If anyone doesn't have any questions, you might, I don't know if you're planning on holding it for awhile before I bring it to the Common Council, but this would be, a good asset to have a restaurant and take out, okay? All right, thank you. Thank you, Councillor.

Councillor, I just would note that on the site plan there is a dumpster with a six foot enclosure around it. Okay. So it is, meets the standard requirements.

Okay, well that's good. Yeah. All right, thank you.

Are there other individuals who may wish to speak in favor of this application? If so, please come to the podium. provide your name and address and comments. Is there anyone wishing to speak in opposition to the application? Please come forward. I see no one rising to speak, so we'll close public comment on this and turn our attention to the environmental 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 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 SECRA review on this application?

Make a motion to issue a negative secret. What are we doing here? Oh, negative secret declaration. Excuse me.

Don't want to put words in your mouth, but I think that's where you were going.

I was just looking at a different. Thank you.

And a second. Discussion on this motion for the secret review. If there's no discussion, all in favor, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed, please say nay. Any abstentions? The secret review carries. And we may now turn our attention to the special use permit. So our action on this item, if there's a motion and a second for it, would go in the form of a recommendation to the Common Council for final action. So is there a motion for the special use permit?

Yeah, I just want to follow up on a comment by Commissioner Murphy. Regarding the trash enclosure there is there is in fact on the drawing a closed enclosure for the dumpster So we do not need to add that as a condition, okay?

It's on the diagram Is there a motion then for action on the special use permit?

I move to find special use permit application SB-2026-41 in compliance with the special use permit criteria as demonstrated by the criteria analysis contained in the staff report pursuant to Syracuse zoning ordinance section 5.4b B, 7, A, and H, and to recommend approval by the Common Council with the following five conditions. Those conditions are as follows. The applicant shall comply with the general conditions for approval of the special use permit application. 2. The proposed curbing and landscaping within right-of-way setbacks shall be installed to prevent vehicles from entering or parking within the public right-of-way. 3. Snow stories shall be maintained on-site in the designated area and shall not encroach into the public right-of-way or adjacent properties. 4. A certificate of use shall be maintained. for the duration of the business, and five applicants shall abide by the hours of operation approved by the planning commission and the common council, and those hours are 11 a.m. to 11 p.m. daily.

Thank you. Is there a second?

Second.

Thank you. Discussion on this motion for the special use permit. 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 special use permit for SP 202641, a motion has carried. It will move on to the Common Council for a final decision there. Thank you both very much. Our next new business item, please.

Another special use permit, SP 2026-45 at 658 West Onondaga Street, owned by Syracuse 7 Properties, applicant Hillary Donahue. This is in the MX1 Zone District.

Can you just scroll to the front elevation? One more up. There we go. Okay. 658 West Onondaga Street is a former Grand Mansion. I do. Oh, sorry.

Name and address for the record, please.

Hillary Donahue, 408 Otisco Street, Syracuse. This was built in 1884 as a single-family home for Silas Hahn, and in its history, it was also kind of a rehab center connected to the property next door. Most recently, it was Atlantic States Legal Foundation's offices, and the current owner, Syracuse 7 Properties, Robin Barrett, purchased it from Atlantic States a few years ago at this point. Robin's intention is to do a partial change of use from offices to offices and a small restaurant under 1,000 square feet. The floor plates are about 3,200 square feet, so the first floor would be converted partially to this 1,000 square foot restaurant, and the remaining space on the first floor would remain offices. The intention there's not a restaurant operator selected yet This is kind of a long renovation process. It's had some recent damage a sprinkler pipe burst a few years ago and So we've been on a long road securing DRI grant funding through the city to do exterior work on this property. And we're coming to this board for the next step in that process to get the special use permit granted. Then we will go forward and apply for the building code permits. And in the meantime, Robin's working with talking to local restaurant groups about potentially operating a small wine bistro with a focus on serving neighborhood residents who are looking for more mixed use, small mixed use development on this stretch. So in this packet, we talked about parameters for this restaurant. We are not intending to operate a pickup delivery service. It's supposed to be just a small sit-down neighborhood spot. Any questions?

Let's find out.

Are there questions for the applicant?

I'm curious. So the renovation is going to continue even when you have not found an operator or the restaurant yet? You're just going to go ahead and hopefully that's going to work out?

Yeah. It's kind of a labor of love. The owner purchased these two side-by-side mansions. They're beautiful in decent condition. And yes, the idea is to put them back together. Atlantic States has actually expressed interest in moving back. When the sprinkler line burst, they relocated They're at Catholic Charities' office now on West Onondaga Street, and they may come back to operate as the office tenant in the future.

Okay, great. Thanks. Other question I have, and this is actually going to be in part a question for the staff. The transportation staff recommended an ADA-compliant sidewalk from the sidewalk to the front door. And I'm curious about that because at the last meeting, this is not for you, Hillary, but for the staff. At the last meeting, I brought that question up relative to the dispensary on Simon Drive because there was a recommendation for an ADA-compliant sidewalk. from Simon Drive to the front of the building. There actually is not a sidewalk on Simon Drive, so I thought that was kind of weird and curious, but staff said at that point in time that there's no, the city does not have the power to require an ADA-compliant sidewalk on private property. So I'm just curious, because in this case, this seems to be a very appropriate place in which a sidewalk should be ADA-compliant, because it goes from the public sidewalk to the front of the building. So I'm just curious about that, I guess. I'm asking that for clarification.

I wasn't here last week. I know. Sorry.

Well, I didn't push the issue last week because it really didn't matter. There's no sidewalk there anyway.

It depends on the musician. So picking up the conversation we had two meetings ago, for a specific that parcel, it's connected to the private street. It's a private property. So this one is connected to the right-of-way. So DBW cannot, because this is directly ADA, will be to the right-of-way in this project, but that project you approve is not. So the distinguishing is because The DBW won't have the ADA compliance in that part, but again, this is a private street, and that application, which is private property, so that part, they cannot make that happen.

All right, so the key was that Simon is also a private street, there's no public right-of-way. Okay, great, so it is appropriate in this case to have a, okay, thanks.

It's also a part of our conditions. Great.

So yes, I received that comment during the review. We have other issues at this property that I haven't worked out with the ADA compliant walk So the accessible entrance is in the back of the property. The building is 3 feet 11 inches from one property line, so we can't fit a 5-foot walk down that side. And then the driveway is 10 feet wide, and it's within 6 1⁄2 feet of the other property line, and it's tight, tight to the building. So if we were to add an ADA walk alongside the driveway, we are basically paving 15 feet wide stretch to the back.

Right, yeah, that seemed pretty clear from the drawings.

Yeah, so I haven't had the follow-up talk with.

Okay, right, so there will be access from the front and from the back.

Yeah, there will be access by means of the paved driveway.

Right, yeah, great, thanks.

And that's the very issue that the planner Mentioned though we're supposed to be separate from the driveway, but that's part of your discussion that you're going to have with with that We don't have sight with enough to accommodate.

Yeah, so I mean we can talk about the neighboring site Thank you further questions for the applicant So it is in the application Hillary that the intent is to serve alcohol it's that the intent is of the owner or of the operator of the restaurant?

That's the intent of the owner. That's what she has been picturing since purchasing the property, a small wine bistro.

So she wants to hold the liquor license?

I don't think, no. I think she would select a restaurant operator that would hold the liquor license. Okay.

And the, I mean, I guess I'm a little challenged at how a six-table restaurant would be. wildly successful, but that's okay. It's not mine. It just feels small. If am I correct, we're going to be serving in two rooms. Yeah, we have two dining rooms, side turret room, and then the connected. Yep, two of the nicer first floor spaces. Right. Okay.

You know, I guess to clarify, too, we are going to establish proposing the hours of operation from Sunday through Thursday from 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. and Friday and Saturday from 7 a.m. to 11 p.m. Those are the bounds we're proposing, yep. Right, okay. And the office, none of the office spaces are occupied right now, is that correct?

No, it's been, I want to say, maybe three years since Atlantic States has moved out. But apparently that was never on the zoning record, converting it to offices.

I got my red bud tree from the back of it.

Yeah, yeah.

Additional questions?

My last question, sorry. The connector is proposed to be no longer existing.

And then presumably just one question leads to another. And that's probably where the accessible entrance will be part, maybe where that connector connected to this building?

Yeah, the accessible entrance was part of the connector. We're keeping the piece that contains the former elevator shaft. Ah, okay. And then the connector will be detached from there.

And the rest, okay. Okay, any further questions? 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 comments.

Good evening. I'm Susan Hamilton of 218 Holland Street. So I live on the next street behind this property. And I would very much like to see even a very small restaurant in there. Right now, there is almost nothing within walking distance, a place to eat, other than the very limited menu and limited hours at Salt City Coffee. But other than that, everything is closed. So I would love to have a restaurant there. I also have tremendous confidence in Robin and Hillary that they're going to do a really nice job, and it'll be a nice way of opening up these lovely mansions so that other people can enjoy the interiors. They're just amazing inside.

Thank you. I'm Glen Kime. I'm the owner-occupant of 669 West Onondaga. I view these houses. I miss them being used and occupied, and I hope for that in the future, and they have enthusiasm and a plan. I think it would be great for my neighborhood, so I am in favor. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. Other individuals who may wish to speak in favor of this application, please come forward. Anyone wishing to speak in opposition to the application, please come forward. We don't have any additional speakers. We'll close public comment on this special use permit application. Turn our attention to the 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 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 special use permit?

Make a motion to issue a negative seeker declaration.

Thank you. Is there a second?

I'll second.

Thank you. Discussion on the seeker motion before us. If not, all in favor of this motion, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed, please say nay. Any abstentions? The seeker motion carries. We may now turn our attention to making a recommendation regarding the special use permit. And again, as always, these actions come in the form of a recommendation to the Common Council, which will make the final decision on this. So is there a motion for action on SP 202645?

MOVE TO FIND SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION SP-2026-45 IN COMPLIANCE WITH SPECIAL USE PERMIT CRITERIA AS DEMONSTRATED BY THE CRITERIA ANALYSIS CONTAINED IN THE STAFF REPORT PURSUANT TO SYRACUSE ZONING ORDINANCE SECTION 5.4B7A-H AND TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL BY THE COMMON COUNCIL WITH THE FOLLOWING EIGHT CONDITIONS. THOSE EIGHT CONDITIONS ARE, ONE, THE APPLICANT SHALL COMPLY WITH THE GENERAL CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL ON THE SPECIAL USE 2. The applicant shall always possess a valid certificate of use issued by the City of Syracuse. 3. The business owner shall abide by the hours of operation set by the Planning Commission and the Common Council. Those hours of operation are 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. Sunday through Thursday, and Friday and Saturday from 7 a.m. to 11 p.m. Four, no neon signage and decorative lighting shall be permitted on the windows of building facade. Five, all outside storage of junk, bottles, cartons, boxes, debris, and like shall be restricted to appropriately screened enclosures not visible to the general public. Six, offering alcoholic beverages in conjunction with food will require meeting all applicable New York state and city licensing requirements. Seven, incorporate an ADA-compliant lead walk connecting the right-of-way public sidewalk to a main entry. And eight, pedestrians show walkways must be kept physically separated from vehicular drive lanes and should also account for room for snow storage.

Thank you. Is there a second to that motion?

I'll second.

Thank you. Discussion on the motion for this special use permit? If we have no discussion, then all in favor of this motion, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed, please say nay. Any abstentions? This motion is approved. It will go to the Common Council as a recommendation for final action. Our next special use permit.

SP-2026-10 at 745 North Salinas Street. This is in the MX4 Zone District. Applicant Shabima Smith.

Is the applicant here or someone representing the applicant?

I recommend we hold it for a few minutes, and if they show up before we end.

We did speak with the applicant. They were aware, so. They posted public notice and everything.

Oh, okay.

Something must have happened. Well, let's move on to the other items, and before we adjourn, we'll come back to this, and maybe they will have arrived by then. Our next one, please.

Other special use permit, SP-2026-30 at 814 Wolf Street. This is in the MX2 zone district. Applicant Patrick Reynolds.

Good evening. Good evening. Lee Harrington for 814 Wolf Street. Special use permit for a retail dispensary. New York State licensed. Special use permit. Smoking establishment.

Okay. Any other details or information to share at this time?

We applied through New York. We have our license application. Everything's approved by them. We just need the special use permit to continue forward.

Thank you. Are there questions for the applicant from the commission members? Excuse me.

We have a note in the staff analysis that there was no indication of whether you wanted to have on-site consumption. So I'm just wondering what...

There is no on-site consumption. New York State will not allow...

Right, understood. I just wanted to clarify that. Okay, thank you.

Additional questions?

Can you confirm your hours, please?

Right now, we're going to be 10 to 7.30. 11 to 7? Okay, 11 to 7. Okay, thank you.

And I guess my next question has to do with the parking, which I find... The site plan seems to indicate that there are more spaces than I could count when I was there. And I'm not sure how you plan to park people to be able to come in and out of the side there.

There's enough to pull in. There's four parking spots. And then we'd have two in the back. So you could pull in, turn around, and come back out.

So nobody's going to park on the left side of your lot line, the far left?

No, no, that's not us. No, that's not our driveway. The left is looking into the building? Yeah. Oh, yeah. That's where our parking space is.

Oh, wait. Oh, there it is.

Yeah, there's a parking.

I'm going to find it in front of me.

I do have all the on-street parking that we're going to use.

Commissioner, I do have one update from staff. So I looked at this to the property line, more or less, is that line straight down from the laundromat building? Yep. This does, by code, require four parking spaces off street. Okay. dpw and the city have never permitted backing out into a street um and i'm just i mean i don't maybe it's possible on the site plan to show a turning radius but we can't permit you to back onto an adjacent property um without an approval or a license or an easement to do so and i'm I guess I would just ask, I just don't know if there's enough space to properly do that without backing out directly into Wolf Street.

We can use like that for the whole history.

Can you come to the mic if you're going to speak, please? I'm sorry. Yeah, that's okay. Just give your name and address.

I'm Timothy Bragan, sir. I own the building. I've owned it for about 15 years now. The parking lot has always been like that, the way it is. I do agree with you. It is a little bit tricky, and it's tight. So if you're pulling out to do a three-point turn to pull forward out, it is tricky. Okay. But that's what we have to work with. I mean, that's that's the way it's been for the duration since the building has been built. I understand we're going for a new license for a new business and I'm open for anything. I had talked to Tim, the owner of Colonial Laundromat next door. OK, so he told me he's like, Tim, we have other laundromats that have other. Marijuana establishments, we have two other ones. People are in and out very fast. If you were a tattoo parlor, I would have a problem with it. He goes, if you need to use some of my spots over here in my parking lot, because they're going to be in and out, I have no problem with that. So would he give me a legal document allowing me access to his property? Probably not. But could I get maybe a lease from him if you really needed it? I probably could.

And or, I mean, I don't know what the right document is, but a letter from him at the very least. Okay.

Is that right? Maybe what I would propose is if the board wishes to entertain it is at a condition that if the parking arrangement is going to stay like this, to make it clear that cars cannot back directly out into Wolf and that you would need to work with the adjacent property owner on a cross-access agreement in order to do so.

Sure. Fair enough. I don't have a problem if we didn't use that for parking for customers at all and only employees. I mean, we have off street park and we have a bus stop right at the front door, which allows us the 20% difference for the parking in the first place, which cuts it down to the four. Right. So, I mean, I'm not opposed to that. There is many businesses up that street that do not have parking.

Wolf Street um if you drive down the street you look I'd be okay with just saying employee parking only if if you wanted that I'd be okay with that well I mean it's not what I want or what the board wants it's what the the code states and you need well we need to approve for viable legitimate parking space that's that's kind of the issue is we're just trying to work through that so we can find four spaces on your property that we can approve okay

Cause I also have the space in the back. So if you look, you look in the back rectangle up against his colonial laundromat building, I was going to use that. I was going to use that for my employee parking back there because they're there for the whole, you know, eight or 10 hours, whatever the shift is, they're not going anywhere. So I figured they could park in there, stay for the duration of the shift. The employees could come in and out. That's, that's what we were thinking. is the plan to stripe those four spaces yes i would absolutely do that we're going to have to do a bunch of work to conform to make you guys happy we're going to redo the sidewalk we agreed to that we're going to do the curb cut um we uh we'll pull we'll do the windows the 12 windows that we put in four by six it's a lot of it's a lot of glazing um but if you guys feel that that's what's necessary, we're here, we wanna conform, guys. We wanna be a part of the neighborhood. We wanna offer a business. Everybody may not agree with the morality of it, but New York State has made the ruling, it is legal, and we would like to give an opportunity to have a shop for the local people in that neighborhood who don't have vehicles, because it's a neighborhood, there's a lot of people there that don't have vehicles. to provide a place for them to go and get what they need to get.

I have one final request. Yes, ma'am. When we review and permit these establishments throughout the city and their new business happening in our city, we have always historically had a SEPTED report, which is a security report done by a police officer.

Okay.

And I would add that as a condition of if it's approved that we require a CPTED report, which the office can easily coordinate for you and with you. And there are nine times out of 10, everybody concurs, agrees, there's no problem. Obviously, if there's a concern, you can come back here and speak to us and make your case.

I have no problem with doing that, man. My son is the head of security operations for Destiny, Timothy Bragan, and he's going to be working with me hand in hand to secure this. We're going to have security 24-7. It will never be open without a security there. I mean, the last thing I want to do, I want to have a very safe environment. I'm looking, as I said, to blend in with the community, to be an asset, not a problem, not a hindrance. I don't want any problems.

Thank you. That's all I have for now.

Additional questions for the applicant? All set, thank you. Okay, thank you.

Thank you all very much.

Are there individuals who wish to speak in favor of this application? Please come forward. Are there individuals wishing to speak in opposition to the application? Please come forward.

I'm Councillor Navi, so I'm aware if it's legal. The only thing I did say to the gentleman, and before it does come to the Common Council, and I spoke to him earlier, is about that he has an issue with his taxes. So we could get it to the council, but then there could be a problem with the, The Department of Finance, if the person's behind the taxes, so they can. I just want you to know that because you're behind in taxes, you're going to, and I've told him that you have to work with the taxation department to get on the plan, that's right?

Sir, I can pay it right now on my phone. Well, no, I know, I know, I know you can.

Okay, the reason why I'm saying that, as long as they show that they are being paid, you know what? So that's, it's important, and I'm saying that, not as a counselor, so that we don't get, someone from the finance department to say, we need you to hold off of that, as long as in knowing that you are a businessman and you want to get this done. I'm not going to oppose the business. I'm not going to do that. But I was just more as a counselor, and I want them, just so they're not told after this meeting, is that we get that, and then I say that, quite respectfully, so we get this out of the way, okay? That's all. Thank you. Yes, sir.

Thank you for pointing that out. I want to let you know I would personally be willing to send a tax receipt to your office tomorrow morning by 9 a.m. No, all you do is you go to the finance department on the first floor. I'll just do it on my phone. Okay, that's fine.

Otherwise, you know, if there's no objectives, no, we can carry it to the council, okay? Thank you. Thank you very much.

So we'll close public comment. One moment.

One other letter of opposition was sent as well.

Oh, I'm sorry. Yes, there was communication by email on the 5th of August from Samuel Prescott. I would consider this, I think, an opposition.

Opposition.

raises several questions and we'll enter this into the record right yeah we included in this thank you so now we'll close public comment turn our attention to the seeker review and see where we go from there sir you will guide us has everyone had an opportunity to review the eaf part one 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?

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. I have a... Heard that. Is there a motion for seeker action on this special use permit application? Move to issue a negative seeker declaration. Second. Thank you both. Discussion on this seeker motion? If not, all in favor, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed, please say nay. Any abstentions? Seeker motion carries. We turn our attention now to the special use permit itself. This is SP 2026-30. And as with all preceding similar cases, action by this body will go in the form of a recommendation to the Common Council for final determination on this project. So is there a motion for action on the special use permit itself?

I move to find special use permit application SP-2026-30 in compliance with special use permit criteria as demonstrated by the staff analysis contained in the staff report pursuant to Syracuse zoning ordinance section 5.4B7A-H and to recommend approval by the Common Council with the following, and I think we have 15 conditions, but I'll go through these and... We can make sure we have them correct because we've had some changes. So, one, the applicant shall comply with general conditions for special use permit approval. Two, the property and business owner are required to complete a CPTED survey and comply with all security and site recommendations within 12 months' approval of the special use permit. I should add to that one, as Commissioner Murphy indicated, that if you have any issues with any of those, you can come back and we can work with them. But by and large, I suspect you'll find them useful and compliant. 3. The business is required to maintain state and local licenses and certificates during the operation of the business. 4. The owner shall apply for retroactive permits for all permitted work completed on site. 5. The rear gravel area marked on the site plan must be paved if it will be utilized for employee parking as noted in the site plan. 6. No additional non-natural or land coverage is permitted without prior consultation with the Office of Zoning Administration as the current non-natural land coverage, which is 81%, are near the limit of what is permitted in the MX-2 zone district. Seven, all construction located within the public right-of-way shall require a separate permit and must be executed in accordance with the City of Syracuse standards and specifications. Eight, the driveway and curb cuts must conform to the typical city allowance of a 24-foot maximum width at the street opening and be properly channelized to provide a safe entry and exit area. Nine, the parking area must be clearly defined and physically separated from the public sidewalk using buffers and durable fixed vertical objects such as concrete-filled ballers. Wheel stops are not sufficient on their own. 10. A staple-style bike rack shall be installed near the front entrance. 11. The applicant shall repair all hazardous conditions on the property and the associated public right-of-way, including replacing poor-conditioned concrete sidewalk flags to meet city specifications and removing vegetation from the expansion joints. 12, the applicant shall receive a sewer capacity assurance letter from the Onondaga County Department before applying for municipal building permit and all plumbing plans must be reviewed and approved by Onondaga County Plumbing Control. 13, any site work on parking lot grading will require a separate permit and a grading plan to ensure stormwater runoff does not flow ONTO THE PUBLIC SIDEWALK. 14, THE HOURS OF OPERATION SHALL BE 11 A.M. TO 7 P.M. MONDAY THROUGH THURSDAY, 11 A.M. TO 9 p.m. Friday and Saturday, 12 p.m. to 5 p.m. on Sunday, as established by the Planning Commission and the Common Council, and 15, no cars shall not be permitted to back out onto Wolf Street. I'm not sure if we can add anything like that that makes sense regarding the other arrangement, but that may need to be worked out, but it's kind of ambiguous. Okay.

I think that covers it. We'll either need a compliant plan on the, maybe you could say a compliant plan within your private property bounds or potentially a cross access agreement with the neighbor. It kind of leaves it open to either figure it out on his own property or, you know, if you're going to utilize the adjacent property to back into slightly in order to turn out front facing forward.

I know we don't have legal counsel, but the purpose you can just add to that dead and shall provide a acceptable compliant plan Yeah, I think that covers it, okay?

That sounds good Thank you very a second Thank you discussion on this motion with the 15 conditions I If there's no discussion, then all in favor of the motion, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Aye. Those opposed, please say nay. Any abstentions? That motion is approved. It will proceed to the Common Council for a final determination there. We have one item under other business, a three-mile limit in the town of Salina, I think.

3 mile limit 3S-2026-11. It's at 131 Old Liverpool Road. We do have the city engineer's approval on this. Thank you very much. Have a good evening. Town of Salina. Okay.

So is there a motion for action on this item with concurrence from the engineering office?

I make a motion to approve 3S-2026-11 as presented.

Thank you.

Is there a second?

I'll second. Thank you. Discussion on the three-mile limit case in Salina? If not, all in favor of this motion, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed? Please say nay. Any abstentions? And three mile limit cases approved. I think our only remaining item is the North Salina Street application. I didn't see anyone new come in, I don't think, in the last half hour.

Are either of you here for that application? You're not? Okay. Just making sure. Okay. It would have been...

This was 745 North Salinas Street. If anyone is here for that, please raise your hand. SB 26-10.

Staff will reach out to the applicant tomorrow and reschedule the meeting, I guess.

So we won't act on this. We'll hold it. It'll revert to our next meeting, and hopefully the applicant can be here for that. Is there anything else to come before us tonight? Okay. Is there a motion to adjourn? So moved. A second? Second. All in discussion? All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, say nay. Any abstentions? We are adjourned until the last day of the month, August 31st.