Palmieri getting huge payoff from STE...

Palmieri getting huge payoff from STEWARTS.

Posted in the Utica Forum

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
UticaSucks

Ithaca, NY

#1 May 14, 2014
This is 100% true along with Berth. If no sale Palmieri doesn't get his deep pockets greased and Berth will lose a sale and be forced to clean the site. A boilermaker gift to Jim Statisus and the mayor. Palmieri is and has been screwing Uticans since election. He went from welfare to getting rich screwing us all, and he don't care.

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#2 May 14, 2014
I sure you have proof of this?

Why would Stewarts pay anything to the mayor? He doesn't seem to have enough clout to make this happen on his own. And what makes you think the mayor cares about a gift to Statisus. What does that accomplish? You people can find a conspiracy everywhere. You claim the mayor is an idiot but think he is capable of pulling off these deals. It doesn't make sense.

Utica Lies and Riggies

Since: May 14

Clifton Park, NY

#3 May 14, 2014
Hopefully Stewarts just pulls the idea of building in utica. Serves all the complainers right. I still crack up how the east chooticans think they hold the power to tell someone where they should build and invest their money. Keep wasting your money on paint for your stupid signs idiots.
american

United States

#4 May 14, 2014
Utica Lies and Riggies wrote:
Hopefully Stewarts just pulls the idea of building in utica. Serves all the complainers right. I still crack up how the east chooticans think they hold the power to tell someone where they should build and invest their money. Keep wasting your money on paint for your stupid signs idiots.
Citizens of utica do hold the power to stop Stewarts because of law voted on few years back regarding distance of convenience stores. East utica residents have the rite to applaud or disapprove of such development. Rigt or wrong

Utica Lies and Riggies

Since: May 14

Clifton Park, NY

#5 May 14, 2014
american wrote:
<quoted text>
Citizens of utica do hold the power to stop Stewarts because of law voted on few years back regarding distance of convenience stores. East utica residents have the rite to applaud or disapprove of such development. Rigt or wrong
Do you have a link to this "law" that doesn't exist?
american

United States

#6 May 14, 2014
Utica Lies and Riggies wrote:
<quoted text>Do you have a link to this "law" that doesn't exist?
Sec. 2-29-605. Retail uses.
[Ord. No. 313,§ 23-205, 12-7-1994; Ord. No. 71, 5-15-2002; Ord. No. 01A,§ 6, 1-7-2009]

(c)
Neighborhood convenience stores. Neighborhood convenience stores shall be special permit uses within the Neighborhood Commercial (C-N) Zoning District. No such use shall be located within 2,000 linear feet of a similar existing use regardless of the zoning district in which such existing use is located and measured from lot line to lot line. As part of the application for a special use permit to the Zoning Board of Appeals, the applicant shall submit a development plan that addresses the following: days/hours of operation; hours of deliveries and services (i.e., trash removal, snow plowing, etc.); provisions for parking, both on- and off-street; provisions to manage and regulate potential impacts of use, including but not limited to: litter and refuse by store patrons, excessive noise, loitering, crime prevention; signage, including both permanent and advertising/promotional signage; staffing; landscaping; and a building floor plan. Every applicant for a special use permit for a neighborhood convenience store in a Neighborhood Commercial (C-N) Zoning District shall also be required to erect a sign upon the property that is the subject of the requested variance. Said sign shall be provided to the applicant by the City Planning Department and shall be placed conspicuously upon the property and in such a manner as to not encroach upon any public right-of-way or publicly owned property. Said sign shall be placed upon the property at least 10 days prior to the date of the hearing and shall remain upon the property until the application for a special use permit has been approved or disapproved. The sign shall measure a minimum of two feet by three feet. All signs remain the property of the City.
american

United States

#7 May 14, 2014

Utica Lies and Riggies

Since: May 14

Clifton Park, NY

#8 May 14, 2014
american wrote:
<quoted text>
Sec. 2-29-605. Retail uses.
[Ord. No. 313,§ 23-205, 12-7-1994; Ord. No. 71, 5-15-2002; Ord. No. 01A,§ 6, 1-7-2009]
(c)
Neighborhood convenience stores. Neighborhood convenience stores shall be special permit uses within the Neighborhood Commercial (C-N) Zoning District. No such use shall be located within 2,000 linear feet of a similar existing use regardless of the zoning district in which such existing use is located and measured from lot line to lot line. As part of the application for a special use permit to the Zoning Board of Appeals, the applicant shall submit a development plan that addresses the following: days/hours of operation; hours of deliveries and services (i.e., trash removal, snow plowing, etc.); provisions for parking, both on- and off-street; provisions to manage and regulate potential impacts of use, including but not limited to: litter and refuse by store patrons, excessive noise, loitering, crime prevention; signage, including both permanent and advertising/promotional signage; staffing; landscaping; and a building floor plan. Every applicant for a special use permit for a neighborhood convenience store in a Neighborhood Commercial (C-N) Zoning District shall also be required to erect a sign upon the property that is the subject of the requested variance. Said sign shall be provided to the applicant by the City Planning Department and shall be placed conspicuously upon the property and in such a manner as to not encroach upon any public right-of-way or publicly owned property. Said sign shall be placed upon the property at least 10 days prior to the date of the hearing and shall remain upon the property until the application for a special use permit has been approved or disapproved. The sign shall measure a minimum of two feet by three feet. All signs remain the property of the City.
...and where does it say the residents can vote yes or no?

Utica Lies and Riggies

Since: May 14

Clifton Park, NY

#10 May 14, 2014
Bobby Oliveira wrote:
Utica Lies,
2 things:
1. The moment you ask for a Zoning Variance, you cause the matter to go before the Common Council. That is where citizens make their voices heard via elected representatives.
2. Other convenience stores are interested in West Utica.
Since it looks like the Common Council would vote 6-3 against this change, I would suggest that the signs were a wise investment.
I still don't see where the residents have a vote. It's their elected officials who vote.

Utica Lies and Riggies

Since: May 14

Clifton Park, NY

#11 May 14, 2014
Bobby Oliveira wrote:
Utica Lies,
2 things:
1. The moment you ask for a Zoning Variance, you cause the matter to go before the Common Council. That is where citizens make their voices heard via elected representatives.
2. Other convenience stores are interested in West Utica.
Since it looks like the Common Council would vote 6-3 against this change, I would suggest that the signs were a wise investment.
Also,

"Stewart’s officials have said they intend to locate in East Utica, and are uneasy about West Utica locations due to the unfinished North-South Arterial project as well as competitors pulling out of proposed locations".

Read more: http://www.uticaod.com/article/20140513/News/...

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#13 May 14, 2014
Bobby Oliveira wrote:
Utica Lies,
2 things:
1. The moment you ask for a Zoning Variance, you cause the matter to go before the Common Council. That is where citizens make their voices heard via elected representatives.
2. Other convenience stores are interested in West Utica.
Since it looks like the Common Council would vote 6-3 against this change, I would suggest that the signs were a wise investment.
Bobby:

I don’t care if Stewarts is allowed to build on Culver Ave. or not. What I do have a problem with is people making unfounded accusation that the mayor or anyone else is taking a payoff from Stewarts. I am certainly no fan of the mayor. I think this whole process could have been handled differently. However, if the residents of East Utica want to work legally to prevent this, good for them. They have the right to protect their property values and their neighborhood even if their logic and reasoning is flawed. This is the democratic process at work. I don’t agree with the false accusations and presumed conspiracy theories being thrown around. Stewarts is a fine company and a great neighbor in many of the areas they are now in. To accuse them of bribery and collusion without any facts to back it up is wrong. Tossing accusations around without facts is also wrong. If you or anyone else has proof of wrong-doings, I will back you 100%. But assumptions and accusations are not proof.

Utica Lies and Riggies

Since: May 14

Clifton Park, NY

#14 May 14, 2014
Bobby Oliveira wrote:
Lies,
You would be correct to say it is not up for "referendum" if that's your point.
While you quoted the OD story correctly, the OD story leaves out one major detail: Internally, Stewart's pitched West Utica first. Therefore, there claims now come across as hollow.
In any event, since I'm not patient and do not trust this city government to be competent, I'm talking to multiple convenience and grocery stores as we speak.
Need to know more?? I'm be at the 4 pm meeting.
How may I ask do you know about what was discussed internally by Stewarts?
american

Carthage, NY

#15 May 14, 2014
Utica Lies and Riggies wrote:
<quoted text>I still don't see where the residents have a vote. It's their elected officials who vote.
The residents voted to put that amendment into the city charter. No new convenience stores closer than 2000 feet of each other.

Utica Lies and Riggies

Since: May 14

Clifton Park, NY

#16 May 14, 2014
american wrote:
<quoted text>
The residents voted to put that amendment into the city charter. No new convenience stores closer than 2000 feet of each other.
And this pertains to the great Stewarts controversy how?
Nano Hockey Convenience

United States

#17 May 14, 2014
american wrote:
<quoted text>
Citizens of utica do hold the power to stop Stewarts because of law voted on few years back regarding distance of convenience stores. East utica residents have the rite to applaud or disapprove of such development. Rigt or wrong
Well you may want to tell the "citizens" of oootica to swing that massive "power" dumbass now you have TWO Stewarts lmao! Wow all this nano hockey bucks are paying off is real high high-paying good-paying high paying jobs! Wooooooo!

The Nano Hockey Convenience triad has spoken to YOU peons!
Taxpayer

Westmoreland, NY

#18 May 14, 2014
Bobby Oliveira wrote:
Lies,
You would be correct to say it is not up for "referendum" if that's your point.
While you quoted the OD story correctly, the OD story leaves out one major detail: Internally, Stewart's pitched West Utica first. Therefore, there claims now come across as hollow.
In any event, since I'm not patient and do not trust this city government to be competent, I'm talking to multiple convenience and grocery stores as we speak.
Need to know more?? I'm be at the 4 pm meeting.
Tonight at the City of Utica Planning Board meeting at city hall the mayor disrespected the dozens of city residents by not showing up, by having the planning department encourage the planning board to approve the Stewarts in East Utica, and the city lawyer called the concerned citizens " The Peanut Gallery" ! In an open public meeting with the press including WKTV present, the city attorney called the public the "peanut gallery". Residents were speaking up demanding that the planning board members speak up so that what they discuss can heard by those in attendance and be recorded . The planning board members were talking to each other without the microphone, and the lawyer could not even here them and said that they needed to speak up so that their deliberations could be recorded, and when the public complained that they could not hear the discussion the city attorney turned around an shouted that the comments from the "PEANUT GALLERY" prevented her from hearing, when she had just told the board to speak up and talk into the microphone so that she could hear and so that the tape recorder could record what they say.
These are the kind of people the mayor had kept as city employees and should be replaced with a professional who respects the people who pay her salary, health care and pension!
Taxpayer

Westmoreland, NY

#19 May 14, 2014
american wrote:
<quoted text>
Sec. 2-29-605. Retail uses.
[Ord. No. 313,§ 23-205, 12-7-1994; Ord. No. 71, 5-15-2002; Ord. No. 01A,§ 6, 1-7-2009]
(c)
Neighborhood convenience stores. Neighborhood convenience stores shall be special permit uses within the Neighborhood Commercial (C-N) Zoning District. No such use shall be located within 2,000 linear feet of a similar existing use regardless of the zoning district in which such existing use is located and measured from lot line to lot line. As part of the application for a special use permit to the Zoning Board of Appeals, the applicant shall submit a development plan that addresses the following: days/hours of operation; hours of deliveries and services (i.e., trash removal, snow plowing, etc.); provisions for parking, both on- and off-street; provisions to manage and regulate potential impacts of use, including but not limited to: litter and refuse by store patrons, excessive noise, loitering, crime prevention; signage, including both permanent and advertising/promotional signage; staffing; landscaping; and a building floor plan. Every applicant for a special use permit for a neighborhood convenience store in a Neighborhood Commercial (C-N) Zoning District shall also be required to erect a sign upon the property that is the subject of the requested variance. Said sign shall be provided to the applicant by the City Planning Department and shall be placed conspicuously upon the property and in such a manner as to not encroach upon any public right-of-way or publicly owned property. Said sign shall be placed upon the property at least 10 days prior to the date of the hearing and shall remain upon the property until the application for a special use permit has been approved or disapproved. The sign shall measure a minimum of two feet by three feet. All signs remain the property of the City.
American . Pay Attention. Maybe if you start going to the meetings you will learn something. The planning department lawyer said that the Nice and Easy on Culver and the proposed Stewarts are NOT convenience stores because they are considered gas stations because they sell gas so this does not apply here!!
Interesting

Jersey City, NJ

#20 May 14, 2014
And what credentials do you have to contact convenience stores and offer potential sites. Are you a licensed real estate broker? Do you have a sales agreement with the buyers ? Do you have an agreement in place to represent the sellers ?

Do have an idea of how many convenience stores have looked at both locations prior to Stewarts ?

Do you have a study that shows the negative impact on residences in the area?

What amount of tax revenue is being generated by these properties now. If the residents have money to hire a lawyer, why don't they just pony up and buy the culver ave property to protect what they have . Put their money where their mouths are.
american

Carthage, NY

#22 May 14, 2014
Well damn. Guess I've been proven wrong. The convenience that sells gas is no longer a convenience store.
Interesting

Jersey City, NJ

#23 May 14, 2014
The only people that were fighting Stewarts were the owners of the other gas station . Use your heads people

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Utica Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Arm Yourself 4 min kest 5
Shooting Victim - Oliston Apts. (May '14) 31 min Truth be told 13
Hey SlobSmith, where you at? 1 hr SlobSmith 11
billy santana out of jail? (May '11) 1 hr Bozo 7
does anybody know about cars?? 1 hr Hellllo 2
West Utica Needs Harmony (Jul '11) 2 hr Sue 14
Clementian St. vandalism 2 hr Bbo 6
jill real 3 hr Mafia 28
Turning stone 5 hr Mafia 46
Brahbam arrest 16 hr Jesus Jones 42

Utica Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Utica Mortgages