Libby Clark, attorney for the applicant, and Ryan Rebedu of Stewart’s presented a revised redevelopment plan for the corner site at Lincoln Avenue and South Broadway (commonly the Stewart’s / Mobile parcel) and requested multiple area variances on Sept. 15.

Requested relief and project background: The application seeks relief from build-out percentage on Lincoln Avenue (required 70% to proposed ~14% in one frontage) and South Broadway (required 70% to proposed 0% on the other frontage); front setbacks measured from South Broadway and Lincoln will exceed the 0–12-foot build-to requirement; a minimum building-height item was listed in the denial but the applicant believes they can meet that requirement with a second-story or a false second-floor facade; and a freestanding monument sign area request of 24 square feet (UDO limit 12 sq. ft.) was included. The project replaces an older corner building and canopy and was previously the subject of permits and variances dating back decades. The site is constrained by existing underground fuel tanks, canopy locations and truck-circulation requirements; those constraints influenced siting and orientation.

Design review, planning and SEQR context: The design-review board reviewed and allowed demolition of an existing house on Lincoln with conditions; the Planning Board has issued a sketch-plan approval and staff noted the demolition underwent SEQR review separately earlier in the process. The planning board and design-review comments influenced the current siting: the design-review board recommended bringing the carriage/garage elements closer to the alley historically and asked for a stronger anchor at the corner. The applicant provided renderings showing a two-story facade appearance (a “false second floor”) and a landscaped civic/green area along the corner to reduce the visual dominance of canopy/pumps.

Signage and partner-branding issues: The freestanding sign request (24 square feet) arises because the project is a co-branded Stewart’s–Mobile site; the applicants said both brands request logo presence on the freestanding sign and that the existing freestanding signage on site is larger (the present sign measures over 40 square feet). Board members discussed options to reduce sign size by moving one brand’s identity to the building fascia or removing one building-mounted sign in favor of the monument to limit total signage area; the applicants said they would try to reduce the requested size and return a final number by Sept. 29.

Public comment and neighborhood issues: Adjacent neighbor Jeff Wood (26 Lincoln Ave) spoke in favor of the current proposal, saying earlier versions were less acceptable and praising the applicant’s noise/lighting mitigation moves and rooftop placement of mechanical equipment. Board members generally praised the presentation, with some requesting the applicant finalize the freestanding sign dimensions and to confirm DRB conditions would be carried forward into final plans.

Next steps: The board asked the applicants for a definitive sign-size proposal for the Sept. 29 meeting and noted that final approvals will incorporate DRB conditions; the public hearing remains open.