June 16, 2008
Planning Board Minutes
Oswego Town Hall
Chair: Jeffrey Boyer
Town Board Members: Francis Dellamano,
Lee Phillips, Barry Pritchard, Judy Sabin-Watson
Attorney To The Board: Stephen Greene, Jr.
Call to Order: The meeting of the Oswego Town Planning Board was called to order at 7:08 p.m. by Chairman Jeffrey Boyer.

Attendance: Those in attendance were:
Jeffrey Boyer
Francis Dellamano
Lee Phillips
Barry Pritchard
Judy Sabin-Watson
Stephen C. Greene, Jr.
Allison Nelson
Joyce Molinari
Attorney to the board
Representing Kevin Caraccioli
Approval of May 19, 2008, Meeting Minutes: Judy Watson made the motion to accept the May 19, 2008, minutes as written. Lee Phillips seconded the motion. Motion carried.

Old Business: Discussion of Site Plan Review for The United Group Oswego Apartment Complex on Johnson Road.

Jeff Boyer explained that we did send the appropriate material to the County and to the City, which is part of the 239 Review. Subsequently, a letter to Kevin Caraccioli, dated May 28, 2008, was received from the County, which stated in one paragraph, “The County Department has reviewed this application, based on materials submitted with this referral, the Department recommends approval for height variance and site plan.” The letter was from David Turner, Director, and Martin Weiss, Associate Planner.

Jeff went on to state in summary, and for the record, that the County has reviewed the material and concurs that the items supplied by The United Group to address potential impacts with the project have been adequately addressed.

Fred Dellamano made a statement, for the record, that it was his impression that the County Planning response was a very short comment for such a serious project – i.e. the height variance and site plan. Discussion followed, and Jeff Boyer summarized that the County is in agreement with what was submitted and that the potential impacts have been addressed by the developer.

Jeff moved on to discussion of the SEQR and asked if there were any comments or questions that Jeff Smetana could address. There were no further questions with the input to the SEQR.

Next, the Board moved to the review of the Proposed Part II of the Environmental Assessment Form. Allison Nelson stated that most of the sections had been reviewed and noted whether there would be a small-to-moderate impact or a potential-large-impact and that the Board should now go through, on the record, each section to make sure everyone is satisfied with the answers that have been provided. She also stated that once that process is completed, the Board can finalize Part II and make a final determination on SEQR.

Allison went through each section, indicating the impact, if any, and whether the impact can be mitigated by a project change. The information given follows.

Impact on Land

1. Will the Proposed Action result in a physical change to the project site?


•Any construction on slopes of 15% or greater or where the general slopes in the project exceed 10%
Potential-Large-Impact that cannot be mitigated by a Project Change
• Construction on land where the depth to the water table is less than 3 feet
Small-to-Moderate Impact

2. Will there be an effect to any unique or unusual land forms found on the site?


Impact on Water

3. Will Proposed Action affect any water body designated as protected?


4. Will Proposed Action affect any non-protected existing or new body
of water?

Yes. Small-to-Moderate Impact. Project will require installation of sewer lines through an unnamed tributary to Ontario Lake.

5. Will Proposed Action affect source or groundwater quality or quantity?

Yes. The Proposed Action would use water in excess of 20,000 gallons per day, a Small-to-Moderate Impact

6. Will Proposed Action alter drainage flow or patterns, or surface water

Yes. Small-to-Moderate Impact. Runoff patterns and volumes are expected to change.

Impact on Air

7. Will Proposed Action affect air quality?

Yes. Small-to-Moderate Impact. Construction machinery are expected to increase air emissions during construction. Tenant vehicles will introduce vehicular emissions into the development site.

Impact on Plants and Animals

8. Will Proposed Action affect any threatened or endangered species?


9. Will Proposed Action substantially affect non-threatened or non-
endangered species?


Impact on Agricultural Land Resources

10. Will Proposed Action affect agricultural land resources?


Impact on Aesthetic Resources

11. Will Proposed Action affect aesthetic resources?

Yes. Small-to-Moderate Impact. The Lodge building will be visible from some areas.

Impact on Historic and Archaeological Resources

12. Will Proposed Action impact any site or structure of historic, prehistoric
or paleontological importance?


Impact on Open Space and Recreation

13. Will Proposed Action affect the quantity or quality of existing or future
open spaces or recreational opportunities?


Impact on Critical Environmental Areas

14. Will Proposed Action impact the exceptional or unique characteristics
of a critical environmental area?


Impact on Transportation

15. Will there be an effect to existing transportation systems?

Yes. Potential-Large-Impact. The alteration of present
patterns of movement of people and/or goods.

Impact on Energy

16. Will Proposed Action affect the community’s sources of fuel or
energy supply?


Noise and Odor Impact

17. Will there be objectionable odors, noise, or vibration as a result of the
Proposed Action?

Yes. Small-to-Moderate Impact. Proposed Action will produce operating noise exceeding the local ambient noise levels outside of structures.

Impact on Public Health

18. Will Proposed Action affect public health and safety?


Impact on Growth and Character of Community or Neighborhood

19. Will Proposed Action affect the character of the existing community?

Yes. Small-to-Moderate Impact. Proposed Action will cause a change in the density of land use. Development will create a demand for additional community services.

20. Is there, or is there likely to be, public controversy related to potential
adverse environmental impacts?


Following the review of Part 2, Allison stated that if the Board was in agreement, the Board could adopt a Resolution determining that this Action is an Unlisted Action under SEQR and issuing a Conditioned Negative Declaration in accordance with Part 2 and

Part 3 of the Long Environmental Assessment Form

Barry Pritchard asked if the sewage issue would have any impact on the above-mentioned resolution, as in the last meeting it was a condition. Allison clarified by saying that it would probably be a condition of the Board’s approval of the Site Plan.

Jeff Boyer summarized the wording of the Resolution to say that the Planning Board declares that the proposed United Group application is an Unlisted Action and issues a Conditioned Negative Declaration of Non-Significant or Insignificant Impact on the Environment.

Francis Dellamano made the motion to accept the Resolution. The motion was seconded by Barry Pritchard. The vote was called as follows:
Jeff Boyer
Francis Dellamano
Lee Phillips
Barry Pritchard
Judy Watson
The Resolution passed.

Allison explained that the next step is the Site Plan. She pointed out that even though the documents were delivered to the City on May 26, 2008, under the 239 Process the City has 30 days to provide their response, which they have not done yet, and since the 30 days have not yet expired, the Board may want to wait until that time period has passed before issuing their decision on the Site Plan.

Discussion followed concerning what impact the City could have on the Board’s decision. It was pointed out that they could come back with recommendations, but that the Board has the right to override their recommendations. It was further clarified that the Board can discuss the Site Plan, but no decision should be made until the 30 days have passed for the City to respond.

Jeff opened up discussion on the most recent modification to the Site Plan, Phase 1 only, with some changes in drainage and retention basins, change of location of the parking, fire lanes, etc. Also, it was explained that there is no Phase 2 at this point.

New Business: None

Public Comment: Greg Hermann suggested holding a Special Meeting after the 30 day waiting period would be up for the City’s response, but before the next regular Planning Board Meeting. The purpose of the meeting would be to discuss the Site Plan, so that the Board could proceed at the July Planning Board Meeting.

Open Board Discussion: The Board discussed the possibility of a Special Meeting. Following the discussion, the decision was made to hold the Special Meeting on Monday, June 30, 2008, at 7:00 p.m. A Legal Notice, concerning the time, date, location, and purpose of the meeting is to be placed in The Palladium-Times as soon as possible.

In response to a request from Francis Dellamano, Jeff Smetana has agreed to provide copies of the final Site Plan to the Board members.

As a matter of clarification, it was stated by Allison Nelson that the Zoning Board’s Height Variance is based on the Planning Board’s approval of the SEQR, and the Planning Board’s Site Plan is conditioned on the approval of the Zoning Board’s Height Variance.

Adjournment: Lee Phillips made the motion to adjourn. It was seconded by Barry Pritchard. The meeting was adjourned at 7:55 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Joyce Molinari,
Secretary to the Planning Board

On the following pages you will find an attachment to the above minutes, which is a copy of the Resolution as was approved by the Planning Board.

At a Regular Meeting of the Planning Board held in and for the Town of Oswego on the 16th day of June, 2008, at 7:00 P.M. at the Town Hall.


In the Matter of an Application by

United Group Development Corp.

For Site Plan Approval
County Route 7
Town of Oswego, New York


, United Group Development Corp. (United Group) has applied for a site plan approval for the construction of a multi-unit student housing complex to be located off of County Route 7 (Johnson Road) in the Town of Oswego’s Residential R-3 District; and

WHEREAS, United Group has submitted a site plan to the Town of Oswego Planning Board that calls for the construction of 5 separate buildings that will house a total of approximately 400 students attending Oswego State University, which is located in and around the proposed development; and

WHEREAS, there have been a number of public meetings concerning the applicant’s site plan and variance requests, including no less than 2 separate well attended public hearings at which the public expressed support for, and opposition to, the project; and

WHEREAS, the Town of Oswego Planning Board and Zoning Board of Appeals submitted the site plan and variance requests to the County of Oswego Department of Community Development, Tourism and Planning, pursuant to NYS General Municipal Law Section 239 (l&m), and further complied with the provisions of Section 239-oo of the same law by submitting a full application to the City of Oswego, given the close proximity of the proposed site to the City’s municipal boundary; the County of Oswego recommended approval of the height variance and site plan; and

WHEREAS, the Town of Oswego ZBA coordinated an environmental review of the proposed site with the Town Planning Board, together with the Town’s engineers, Barton & Loguidice; and

WHEREAS, in furtherance of the SEQRA requirements, the ZBA conducted a Visual EAF Addendum as part of the Long EAF completed by the Town Planning Board with the assistance of the Town’s engineers; and

WHEREAS, the Planning Board has again reviewed environmental impact the application may have on the Town as well as the requirements of the for site plan approval for the Town of Oswego, and

NOW, THEREFORE, upon motion made by board member Francis Dellamano seconded by board member Barry Pritchard is and shall hereby be,

RESOLVED, that the Planning Board does hereby affirm that the proposed application of United Group requesting site plan approval to construction 5 separate buildings that will house a total of approximately 400 students attending Oswego State University to be an Unlisted action pursuant to the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act hereinafter SEQRA; and it is further

RESOLVED, that the Planning Board affirms its desire to act as lead agency for said action and after no objection from any interested or involved agencies, declares itself the lead agency for said action; and it is further

RESOLVED, that the Planning Board, as lead agency, has reviewed Part 1 of a Long Environmental Assessment Form, answered Part 2 questions on the record and reviewed Part 3; and it is further

RESOLVED, that after full review of Part 2 and Part 3 of the environmental assessment form, the Planning Board declares that the proposed action could have a significant effect on the environment, however there will not be significant effect for this Unlisted Action because the mitigation measures described in Part 3 are being required and therefore a conditioned negative declaration will be prepared; and it is further

RESOLVED, that the Planning Board authorizes Chairman Boyer to sign the Long Environmental Assessment Form declaring a conditioned negative declaration pursuant to SEQRA and submitting the Conditioned Negative Declaration to the Environmental Notice Bulletin in accordance with the provisions of SEQRA.

The motion having been placed before the Planning Board for a vote was adopted by a vote of 5 in favor, 0 opposed and 0 absent in accordance with the following roll call vote.
I HEREBY CERTIFY the above to be a full, true and correct copy of a resolution duly adopted by the Planning Board of the Town of Oswego, on the date first mentioned.

Back to 2008 Planning Board Agendas & Minutes
Back to Planning Board Web Page
Top of Page