Board reviews Route 31 site for bakery tenant; neighbors raise traffic and facade concerns

The Cicero Planning Board conducted a second review of a proposed change of use and signage at 5866 Route 31, where the applicant seeks to replace a former gym tenant with a bakery tenant and update two wall-mounted signs.

Keeper Kale, who identified himself as representing Max Property LLC and speaking for the project through Kwman Associates, said the proposal includes two replacement wall signs — a northern-facing sign listed in the plans as about 30.9 square feet facing Route 31 and a western-facing sign of about 15.8 square feet — and that no other significant site changes were proposed. He described the location as a separate tax parcel and said the prior use (a metabolic fitness gym) had similar traffic but concentrated during class times; the applicant expects traffic to be more spread out under the bakery use.

Residents and nearby property representatives raised traffic and access questions. Brian Cohen said the bakery’s traffic would likely be spread across the day and compared expected volumes to the prior gym use: "it's spread out more throughout the day" and he said he travels the area multiple times daily. Cohen also said the developer had expanded parking previously and that the site has 34 parking spaces.

Heather Petrava, introduced herself during comment and said she welcomed a bakery in town: "welcome, excited about having a bakery in our town," she said. Other board members and applicants debated facade treatment and compliance with architectural design standards; concerns included adding a base or midsection, color/material breaks, and whether an awning would be feasible on the building’s insulated exterior finish.

The board asked the applicant to submit revised elevations and sign dimensions; staff reminded the applicant that materials must be provided in time for the next meeting (the applicant was told the next meeting is two weeks away). The transcript records discussion of a possible continuance to let the applicant update elevations and to add awnings or other facade treatments; staff said they would provide remarks from the architectural consultant and that the item would return after materials are submitted.

No final approval vote for the Route 31 modifications is recorded in the transcript; the item was left to be returned for further review once the applicant supplies revised drawings and materials.