City Council - Regular Meeting

I know well should I know e thank you all right it is now 6 o'clock um we will start this meeting we on record I call this meeting to order of the Syracuse City business meeting um tonight we will uh begin with an invocation uh Brett can I ask you to do that and then we'll begin with a pledge Paul would you lead us in that our father in Heaven it's with

gratitude that we gathered together this evening and uh work together to do the business of the city we're grateful that we have our city and good people who are here we ask thee to please provide blessings that are needed we ask the to please bless us tonight with wisdom and discernment as we try to work together to reach the best results we grateful again all that we have and include in the name of Jesus Christ Al uned States stands na God indivisible withy and justice for all can I get a motion to adopt the agenda agenda no moved second all in favor I any opposed okay our first item of business is public comment this is a chance for our citizens to uh bring to our attention something that may not be on the agenda that you'd like us to discuss we do have three public hearings if your comments are regarding one of those you may want to wait till the uh item is brought forward that would be items 10 11 and 12 other than that is there anyone here that would like to make a public comment seeing none I will close public comment the next item of business is meeting minutes we have minutes from January 14th and January 28th to approve Council are there any changes or amendments to that if not I'll take a

motion mayor I uh propose that we accept the minutes of uh January 14th and January 28th as written second motion made in second it all in favor I any opposed motion passes unanimously the next item is our consent agenda we have four items on the consent agenda proposed resolution R 25-6 appointing the mayor and city council to various committee positions and assignments Item B is uh ordinance a proposed ordinance 25-01 correcting Mis references throughout the Syracuse Municipal Code um that's just titles mostly uh to make sure we have a unified code uh item C is proposed resolution r257 amending the Syracuse City wage scale for the fiscal year 2425 um and item D is proposed ordinance 25-5 or2 amending title four of the Syracuse Municipal Code related to housing waste recycling and green waste recycling okay are there any of those that you'd like to remove for discussion can we pull out item a just to briefly touch on one thing that I think might be I would agree to do that we will pull off item a can I get uh any others discussed or we should we just vote on b c and d let's go ahead I I motion that we accept items B C and D from the consent agenda second item made or motion made and seconded all in favor I I any opposed okay that passes unanimously let's immediately go to item a uh for discussion Jordan so the only item I would change is one of the things we didn't look at in the meeting last or

two weeks ago now um was the positions of Mayor protem assistant Etc I've been a mayor proem for a few years now and I think it probably good to give other someone else a chance would you be opposed if I I think Paul is the second correct would you be opposed if I just swap us places I am friendly to that amendment I would be fine with that there any objections otherwise okay so I'll take a motion on item a with that one adjustment so moved second that we accept moved and seconded all in favor I I any opposed motion passes unanimously item number five proposed resolution r25 8 pertaining to or appointing uh Peter Anderson to the Syracuse City Planning Commission I will say really quickly that I interviewed several really good candidates and this is awesome I will tell you what distinguished uh Peter above the others that I was impressed with is that he's worked on several projects here in the city that don't conflict but in particular uh did some work on the West Davis Corridor which I think is one of the things we're discussing now is how we adjust to that so I think his influence on the commission would be very valuable uh any discussion other than that if not I'll accept a recommendation to appoint Peter to the Planning Commission uh so moved second moved and seconded all in favor I any opposed welcome Peter he's up in the audience uh item number six authorized Administration to award the 2025 utility project contract to AAA excavation is there any discussion on this item or do we need a preference from public works it was in the packet I

was I'm always impressed by the spread of bids that we receive uh but I'm assuming we we believe they can do the work so there's no reason not to to move forward I have not seen any of these names before so it's nice to see new uh companies reaching out and putting in for bids and not the same old ones every time it gives more people a shot to get some City work we have not worked with triple A before uh I have done some reference checks and uh they do good work um the only complaints I've received is uh keeping on schedule so that's something we'll spend a little more time with them throughout the process to be sure they can stay on schedule so but yeah other than that they do good work from what I've heard any other question not I'll take a motion I propose I move accept proposed I I move that we accept to authorize Administration to award the 2025 utility project contract to Triple A excavation Inc second moved and seconded all in favor I any opposed motion passes unanimously item number seven proposed ordinance r253 amending the Syracuse City zoning map for 13.75 Acres of real property located at approximately 3100 South 2300 West from residential R1 to planned residential development PRD applicant is Woods Cross properties Noah we've talked about this great is there anything new we should know yeah there nothing has changed since last time we spoke about this except my opinion okay um so I don't know why I went back through and looked at this again but I did um the fencing I have a huge problem with and I'm not willing to

prove based on what it is it says that Woodside will fence the East and West boundaries of the residential lots within the developer property with a six- foot white V vinyl fening if the city desires the six- foot concrete pre-cast fence on the west side of the residential property the city will reimburse Woodside for the cost of the increase of the final to Precast now the west side of their property is against public works and although it is on the map as um civil or municipal or civil what is it on there is Civ Civic that's what it's on their it's very clearly an industrial uh property um they've already Public Works has already replaced most of their fencing with pre-cast to accommodate the housing around there so I feel like they need to put in what they already have around there because it is industrial and what's required on our fencing is if single family is going around industrial its eye and it's a pre-cast six- foot fence and I don't think the taxpayers should have to pay the difference for that I think that's a good point to bring up I will note that I think one of the reasons why this may have been uh stated that way is we're getting some free land we are getting land that we didn't previously have between the houses and public works or the use of public works as a part of this deal I I feel like it still puts it around so it was that the deal that was made with them that no there's no deal in particular that addresses so okay so yeah I feel like this needs addressing because in in our uh code it says that around industrial but just because it's cited as it's owned by the city it's still very clearly an industrial property I I agree with that but what is it

actually Zone the hard part is is civic1 it's R1 that's the problem is if it were Zone industrial um I think that proposal would for the city the property is this has been our one and the land trade puts it in our city and we are depend we're planning to use it for industrial what I'm saying is what is what what is Public Works currently already zoned that's the question is it industrial or it's not zoned industrial I believe it's our one but on the map it shows the general plan map shows it as Civic yes yeah that's and what's on here yeah shows it is Civic but all of because it's a city property and I agree that it's quote unquote obviously industrial but the letter of the law says unless it is zoned industrial they have no obligation I I I think that could be easily CH the problem with it is is we've had a lot of issues over the last two years of people residents complaining about the sounds where it comes to loading snow uh removal equipment and things like that that is literally where we do it at so I we're setting those residents that are going to be moving into those houses up for failure if we don't I I agree that no matter what happens it should be concrete yeah okay okay um so I think we're in accordance with that and so they would have to pay the Delta to upgrade from six foot vinyl to 8 foot concrete so that's saying the city the city would have have to pay them okay but but again I don't think we could tell them to build pre-cast concrete simply because it's not actually zoned industrial so the ordinance doesn't apply I even though it is obviously industrial I I do think there is one unknown here and that is how we choose

to use that uh added property because at present I believe part of it will be detention Basin that is shared between the two loc between us and them to free up the existing water retention area so in that case the concrete fence that's already around the truck and things is is still in place I don't think I mean this is just one thought I am not suggesting that this is not something that we should consider I'm just saying that that's we don't know what we're going to use the added space for today we but added space doesn't block too much sound where it comes to disturbing people sleep at 3 in the morning okay that's a good point and there's no sound barrier that six foot vinyl isn't going to block the sound of our equipment loading salt what's the the alternative is a six foot pre-cast yeah I don't know how much that's GNA that's what I'm saying that's a huge cost to us well it seems like the other side right that's our side of the fence and sometimes your neighbors don't want to fund well they're they're and and and it's our responsibility to be a good neighbor too it's our side of the fence but our side there's nothing there currently so they're putting houses in there so now it's their side of the fence and their respons theirs and ours correct it will be a border it will be a border and so sometimes your neighbor doesn't want to fund when you say can you split the cost of the fence for instance with me and so so for us to be a good neighbor you know we're going to need to put in that fence the cement perhaps I could add some context yes please so in in the buffer ordinance uh it does go by by use not necessarily zone so a strict interpretation of the ordinance would require a concrete fence between those two differing uses you're not wrong because industrial does say

what it explains what it is okay yeah so so that is accurate it is required to have a fence between two different okay that's what I interpreted is and of course uh we we don't want to give away anything where taxpayer dollars are being used and so as far as context the development agreement does specify that that we will pay for that upgrade um that's also what we've done with Woodside in the past to upgrade from a six foot to a 8ot fence because that's even taller than what the ordinance would require the ordinance would require a six I believe yes so and in the context of things the city is trading land fewer Acres that we're giving away in exchange for more Acres so it's not necessarily free land but it is it's all in the development agreement of what the exchange is and so part of part of this is does include a development agreement along with the rezone and so uh there's that was taken into account the value of the land that the city is exchanging for what we're getting there's also some storm drain improvements that will be made on Public Works land that we will be paying for and so that or assisting so it it it all comes into the equation of of a trade so it is you're right it is required by ordinance to have that buffer but the value of that fence upgrade was factored into the value of the land and the reason why we're agreeing to pay the increase because that is what we've the way we had done it with Woodside previously so so I I understand going up

to an eight foot fence I from a sixf foot because we require a six foot and if we were like hey if you got we would like an eight foot so we'll pay the difference in the between a six foot and an 8 foot I just feel like that's a Hu a huge cost but if it was factored into I think what Noah is pointing out is that the net gain of the value of the land I I understood that part exceeds the the finance I under that so Council so should that say in there instead of if the city wants that that that's what they need to put in and the City will cuz I don't I don't want a six foot vinyl fence going in that's just going to have to be ripped out and a concrete fence going in CU nobody checked it's a waste of money no that's a good point I think we plan on putting the concrete fence up regardless so either way that I'd rather not waste the resources on the environment though I I don't think they're planning on putting up a vinyl fence I mean I I think that the city plans on upgrading to the concrete fence or they just going to write us a check for that value how does that work yeah maybe Robert can explain how it worked last time with wood with with Woodside I I believe that um the money that Woodside would have spent was sent to the city so we hired the contractor and then Woodside sent us the value of what they would have spent so I think that's the same is that I'm acknowledging he's nodding so I I think sorry I didn't mean to put you on the spot but I do it all the time don't about it in my opinion if this was factored in as part of the negoti ation of the trade deal then for us to yank it at the very last minut I don't should do that if we've really considered the value I agree I agree but I I also feel like we it should be a little more specific that there is in fact a a concrete fence uh going in that way it doesn't leave room

for interpretation for uh someone who was out there that wasn't in the the meeting and said that's what the development says that's what we're doing it just seems like a whole lot of waste of money if some something just happens by accident I think we could solve this with a motion to approve making the concrete fence uh the only option or you know that that will happen I agree dop uh anybody else or can I just go ahead go ahead all right I move that we approve proposed ordinance 25-3 amending the Syracuse City zoning map for 13.75 Acres Real Property located at approximately 3100 South 2300 West R1 to plann residential development PRD with the exception of the fencing being concrete a second is that clear enough because with with the exception of the wall has to be concrete yeah there's no other option yeah that has to be concrete and I see Colin making notes Here I think he'll he'll make it work adjust he speaks Jen it's fine okay in that okay motion made in second all in favor I I any opposed motion passes unanimously item number eight proposed ordinance 25-4 amending the Syracuse City zoning map for 1.41 Acres of real property located approximately 2695 West 1700 South residential R1 to professional office applicant uh Jonathan gilb so we've talked about this when great depth this is uh you know a project that we at least in in previous said that this makes sense as professional office does anybody have any further discussion or comments I like how their fcing was

spot on okay all right I'll take a motion then we approve article 25-4 second moved and seconded all in favor I any opposed okay that's second um item number nine proposed ordinance 25-5 amending the Syracuse City zoning map for approximately 7.05 Acres of real property located approximately 1185 South 3000 West agriculture A1 to residential R2 applicant is Jacob Jones just for clarity at 0.705 did I say okay Z for clarification zero or 0.705 Acres that whole thing is surrounded in uh vinyl fence so you can't see anything currently so driving past it you can't really figure out like I know since since before they put that vinyl fence in that there is a basin right there but it it feels like this is rezoning for something that's already like fenced in partially around the side and this is very weird this I get it but it's very weird I I'm fine with it is weird it's very I mean yeah it it borders R2 they're going to make it R2 and they're going to make the because this is the one that they they're doing commercial and that there's no way to make that work there it's so so if they can put a couple of houses on there yeah I just want to see when it's done see how it turned out I motion that we approve proposed ordinance 25-5 okay moved and seconded all in favor I I any opposed motion passes unanimously item number 10 is the first of our public hearings but first let's uh point out it is proposed ordinance

25-5 amending the Syracuse City municipal title 10 chapter 30 pertaining to buffer yards uh Noah do you want to give us a preview of what this is since we do have a public hearing sure um this would pertain to the required fencing between new development and the West Davis Corridor currently there is no standard um this way we would unify what the fencing would look like it' be a stone pattern concrete fence um all the way up and down um and we think that that will protect the property owners from freeway stuff and uh you know protect property values and health safety welfare okay so I'm going to open public public hearing this is a chance for anybody who would like to weigh in um and let the council know how you feel before we take an action on this item is there anyone from the public that would like to talk about our new buffer from what we didn't have which was a freeway Zone and uh current properties seeing none I will close the public hearing council do you have any discussion or can we get a motion I just want to say I feel like very clearly that good fences make for good neighbors to include between our citizens and UD do so this is I Mo we we uh accept proposed ordinance 256 second moved and seconded all in favor I I any opposed motion passes unanimously item number 11 is also a public hearing proposed ordinance 25-7 amending the Syracuse Municipal Code subsection 10. 28.1 120g relating to pedestrian access walkways in commercial developments this

is very specific again related to the highway so uh Noah do you want to give us a really quick version of what we're going to talk about um yes uh we wanted to make sure that our commercial developments are really safe for pedestrians especially when they're passing through a parking lot and so we do have a standard where it's required to to provide a pedestrian walkway from where the road is to the front door of the of the business and this just clarifies what that walkway is to look like when it's in a parking lot than I will now open the public hearing is there anyone here that would like to talk about uh pedestrian Crossings in commercial developments seeing none I will close public hearing Council I really like this one good even if the paint isn't refreshed regularly it is still very obvious where they should be Crossing I mean look at Smith's that's perfect right in their parking lot same kind of you know where it's at okay I'll take a motion I move that we approve proposed ordinance 25- 07 second moved in seconded all in favor I any opposed motion passes unanimously item number 12 is the last of our public hearings this is proposed ordinance 25-8 amending Syracuse Municipal Code title 10 chapter 20 establ establishing General land use application requirements uh this is basically uh this is the one to uh make sure that we only deal with one at a time which is very important because it's hard to have conflicting applications and not have somebody cry foul uh so I will open public hearing is there anyone who would like to talk about

Colin this proposal went to the Planning Commission I had previously proposed that we exempt land use applications that require multi-stage approvals the Planning Commission correctly noted that sometimes our land use applications require concurrent approvals so there's a slight change between what you saw before and what you have before you and that is that the current proposal would exempt both concurrent approvals and multi stage approvals when those are required by our code um so I'm going to I'm going to discuss this because when I was at Planning Commission and I heard them discuss that I felt like that didn't apply at all to the purpose of this ordinance which was to have multiple applicants this is in that case it would be multiple applications from the same applicant which I think would be acceptable because that we can have concurrent applications for the same development what we're trying to avoid is having uh conflicting applications of what to do with a property because then you pit them against each other in a public state which is really uh undesirable um to try and you know we already have the commitment that you have to be a landowner or under contract so it's really kind of odd that you'd have conflicting applicants so add section covers that I feel like so say like Woodside Homes can put in a few different things for applications in that one property but Woodside Homes and Castle homes can't put in an application on the same property that's what we're trying to avoid is that clear do you feel in the language I'm not I'm not certain that that's entirely clear but I think and I'll defer to Noah there are times and I'm thinking it's the PRD Zone that requires an application for a zone

change and an application for a site plan approval at the same time and I think that's what the Planning Commission was trying to address I think but are those from the same applicant yeah and I think our intention was never to prevent that Our intention was that that would always go forward because that specific application requires multiple phases at once we're trying to prevent mpar applicants like application War do you have a suggested amendment to make that clear no application Wars we just write that in if you would consider mayor um going on to other matters I'll try to fix it here and come back to it if you would all right we'll come back to that when we will also delay the public Hearing in that matter uh item number 13 is proposed ordinance R 25-9 amending uh Syracuse municipal code title five chapter 30 pertaining to door-to-door solicitation uh I will say that this one was motivated a lot by call-ins of people who were concerned that we don't have any language to deal with uh doorto door solicitation so this was an attempt to resolve that uh who's handling is there any discussion on this or it's me and I'm happy to answer any questions I think this was just an update to what we already passed right this is just clarifying language that's correct asking them if they have checked in with the city gets rid of solicitors so fast okay so is there anybody who has any questions on this no I'll take a motion then I move that we accept proposed ordinance 25-9 second moved and second it all in favor I I any opposed okay that motion

passes unanimous the next next item is proposed resolution r259 wait a minute we already had an r259 hold up uh Cassie can you help me with that it was an ordinance 2509 and now we have a R9 yeah that should be okay all right so this is a resolution adopting updated City mission and vision statements to provide unified direction for municipal operations we have discussed this in multiple meetings is there anybody who has any further comment on this from the council before we adopt thank you for putting in in public safety no I thought it was good that was it okay I like seeing that I will take a res or proposal I move that we accept resolution r259 adopting the updated City mission and vision statements second moved and seconded all in favor I any opposed that passes unanimously and just by way of update in our uh next work session we will be talking about how we measure these statements and uh expect to spend a little bit of time on that I'm I'm excited for what the staff's working on Colin can we come back to our our item 12 go ahead let me Pitch this to you um if you'll take a look at paragraph M1 I would propose to put a couple of word changes in there no conflicting land use application will be accepted while a previously filed land use application for the same parcel or address is pending for purposes of this subsection an application is pending if it is under review by a land use Authority the city council or the Judiciary and with that insertion of the word conflicting in paragraph one I think we can delete

paragraph two entirely I like that good job saving Inc lawyer vernacular all right does anybody have an issue with that nope uh can I get a motion because oh wait a minute public hearing uh so I will now open that to public hearing is there anyone here that would like to speak on uh the idea of not having conflicting applications see none I will close public hearing and now I will take a motion I move we accept propos ordinance r or sorry not R ordinance 25-8 uh adding the word conflicting to section one as outlined by call and striking and striking section the second paragraph second paragraph all right second moved and seconded all in favor I I any oppos that long time to start that considering you almost started it three times all right so now we are to our second public comment period this would be a chance for anyone to come forward and bring to our attention something you might like to see on a future agenda or something that you'd like to comment on is there anyone in the public that would like to make a public comment come forward please I will ask you to state your name and your place of address just this Mike bend the mic backwards Chief don't arrest me hi I'm Dave acman live at 2608 West 1770 South uh we're at the very end of when the West Davis quarter was being done and envelope being constructed and also

where the frontage road is at right there's been several issues with uh the weeds growing higher than what I am over six feet and the properties that have been bought by UD do uh no one is getting in touch with those owners I did get in touch with one owner and asked if I could mow that property so it could be maintained we're getting a lot of rodents wild animals moving into the residential area it's becoming a health issue the second is the land that is right behind us between the four or five houses that are right there and Frontage Road there it's about 30 to 40 ft it's all dead spaced the city's supposed to either the city or UD is supposed to go mow that but they're not doing it no one's doing it and I came in and talked to city employees just this last week and said I'm going to go behind my house and mow in between that area it doesn't seem right to me that a citizen in Syracuse has to take care of either state owned property or city- owned property or other person's property to ensure that they're within code of the weeds and the upkeep of land okay and if the when I talked no one knows if UDOT has turned over the land to the city yet that's behind us and can't tell me what's going on because I don't know if there's a feud but you uh the city will talk about how UD do has mowed it and I've we've lived there since 2004 and UD dos never come by and mow anything and the cities come by once but they're mowing across the other side between antalope and Frontage Road there are fire hydr that are up there that are not visible because the weeds were so tall you didn't even know they were there okay so something needs to be done either the maintenance needs to be done or if the city doesn't want to take care of the land maybe turn it over to those couple residents that are there we

can increase our property size and alleviate the cost from the city to take care of it and maintain it just for your we can't comment on a subject that's not on our agenda right but I can defer you to uh immediately following this meeting we have City officials who would be happy to talk to you about this and we can talk to you about it after I can't make an agenda item out of it sorry I understand yeah just only Bring It Forward trying to find the right people that will answer phones too no no I I appreciate bringing it forward but I just rules for the state don't allow us to make it an agenda discussion okay that was good information conveniently all the right people are here yeah yes they are are there any other public comments seeing none I will close public comment and I think this month we start down at youren gen with mayor and Council announcements I shockingly don't have anything except for sorry for putting you on the spot once again Mr Robert Jordan uh also I have uh nothing specific wonderful PA don't have anything I don't have anything okay and nor do I so we will finish with that and I will take a motion mayor oh did you wan to thank you about talk about the bills yes uh I told Brody to remind me because I knew I was going to forget um there have been some fast movement at the state with regarding bills uh Brody and I were in a meeting yesterday um there were shockingly some very uh some things that do deal with us quite a bit and so I've asked Brody to prepare an update on some of the bills that we are seeing um because you do need to be aware we won't be able to discuss this it's not an

agenda item but we have a provision to allow us to to update legislation that's actively happening Ro yeah in your in your box in your teams box I've I've uh posted a a Word document with some selected bills that you may find of interest to to follow and uh if there's anything any action that we need to take um that you feel like we need to take uh let's talk about it and these bills are moving some of them some of them are just held up in committee and may never get out but um we're watching them anyway to see if they move uh so in that document you can see the current status of the bill and also the current position the league of cities and towns has has taken on each of these um that those things can change but um if any of these need action or you feel like we need to talk to our legislator about let us know uh I will use my mayor's minute just to bring up some of the ones that were hot topics the other day for you to pay attention to there is one trying to eliminate garages from Properties or the or our ability to require garages there is one that deals with uh parking that feels like the requirement for parking is burdenis to create or to the price of a property which I think not having parking is we found to be a greater burden um so those are quite concerning because they seem to have some motion right now that are active so I would encourage you all to take a look at that um there is one that discourages development agreements uh I think that that also is concerning as well because development agre Agreements are a tool that has been very useful to the city so can I ask a question yes what happened to

433 which one was that agriculture AGR tourism uh building codes yeah um I can look up the status real quick see if what happened today but that's still there yeah if you want us to monitor that when we can okay all right there's there's sorry there there's probably like a actually a hundred to to monitor but if what I want to focus on is uh everything that we can we can actually works our stop fighting between farmers and Noah well I I think in particular the ones that deal with building code is concerning because um we're there are necessity NE Necessities to a home this is concerning agriculture is what it was though okay without further Ado I will take a motion to adjourn so moved second moved and seconded all in favor I I any opposed okay we are adjourned thank you