[00:00:20]
WELCOME TO THE JANUARY 20TH 2, 20 21 MEETING OF THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD.
EVERYONE PLEASE RISE FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA STATES, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS ONE NATION UNDER GOD WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FRAUD.
SORRY ABOUT THAT, BOB, THANK YOU FOR TELLING ME.
UH, WE ONLY HAVE ONE ITEM ON THE AGENDA TODAY.
THAT'S BROADWAY GROUP, LLC, REQUESTING SECOND PLAN, APPROVAL OF A NEW DOLLAR GENERAL STORE TO BE LOCATED AT 6 5 0 5 SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD.
SO AT THE LAST MEETING, WE HAD A RESIDENT RAISE SOME ISSUES ABOUT I, I GUESS THE LEGALITY OF THE ZONING OF THIS PLACE, OF THIS, UH, PLOT.
AND I ASKED BOTH ATTORNEYS FOR BROADWAY GROUP AND OUR OWN ATTORNEY TO LOOK INTO THAT.
SO I'D LIKE TO START WITH, UH, BROADWAY GROUP.
UH, WHAT WAS YOUR POSITION ON THOSE ISSUES RELATED TO THE ZONING? SO, CAN YOU HEAR ME? I APOLOGIZE.
SO, UM, I DID SEND A LETTER ADDRESSING THE ZONING ISSUE AMONG A COUPLE OTHER ISSUES, BUT WITH RESPECT TO THE ZONING ISSUE, AND, UM, QUITE FRANKLY, THERE'S A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT REASONS WHY IT SHOULDN'T BE CONSIDERED.
BUT, YOU KNOW, THE BIGGEST REASONS ARE ONE, YOUR, YOUR BOARD DOES NOT HAVE JURISDICTIONAL OVER ZONING.
UM, SO EVEN IF THERE WAS AN ISSUE, THIS WOULD NOT BE THE APPROPRIATE FORUM.
TWO, THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS TO CHALLENGE ANY CHANGE TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE WOULD'VE BEEN EXP PASSED EITHER FOUR MONTHS OR SIX YEARS, DEPENDING ON THE MANNER IN WHICH THEY ATTACK THE ZONING CODE.
AND WE'RE DECADES REMOVED FROM THAT.
SO THAT'S THE FIVE SECOND VERSION OF WHY THE ZONING ISSUES RAISED, NOT ONLY ON THIS SITE, BUT GOING BACK AND LOOKING AT OTHER MINUTES.
I KNOW IT WAS A VERY SIMILAR ARGUMENT WAS RAISED WHEN THEY DID THE PROPOSED TIM HORS.
THEY'RE JUST NOT LEGAL ISSUES THAT, UH, UH, ONE, THEY HAVE NO APPLICABILITY TO THE PLANNING BOARD AND THEY HAVE NO LEGAL GROUNDS.
UH, MS. PSI, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD TO THAT? I ESSENTIALLY AGREE, UNFORTUNATELY, THE PLANNING BOARD HAS NO JURISDICTION TO CONSIDER ZONING THAT IS UNDER THE PURVIEW OF THE TOWN BOARD.
SO THIS AREA IS AN ALLOWABLE USE UNDER THE ZONING CODES ZONING.
SO ZONING CODE, UNFORTUNATELY, THAT'S KIND OF WHERE THE PLANNING BOARDS GROUNDS END.
IT'S ZONED CORRECTLY AT THE SPOT.
SO WE CAN'T DO ANY, WE CAN'T CONSIDER IT ANY LONGER.
UM, NOW THE PUBLIC HEARINGS BEEN CLOSED.
UH, IS THERE, UM, ANY MORE INFORMATION ANYBODY IN THE PLANNING BOARD FEELS WE NEED BEFORE MOVING TOWARDS THE NEXT STEP? YOU, YOU ALL SAW, WE ONLY GOT ONE PIECE, ONE PIECE OF CORRESPONDENCE THAT WAS FROM DOT, MR. CAROLLA MARY INCLUDED IN HIS SUBMITTAL, BUT YOU GUYS SHOULD HAVE A COPY TOO.
DOT IS BASICALLY AGREEING YOU'RE GONNA BE LEAD AGENCY FOR THE SUN COORDINATOR REVIEW AND REMINDED THEM OF PERMITS THEY NEED FOR ANY WORK WITHIN THE STATE HIGHWAY RIGHT AWAY.
THEY DID NOT COMMENT ON ANYTHING ELSE REALLY.
UM, I JUST WANTED TO FOLLOW UP AND SAY THAT I HAD A LONG CONVERSATION WITH ED RAKOWSKI, I GUESS THE DAY OR TWO AFTER OUR LAST MEETING ASKING SOME QUESTIONS.
AND, UM, I GUESS THE CONCLUSION THAT I CAN COME TO FROM THAT CONVERSATION IS, IS WE PROBABLY WILL NOT GET MUCH MORE FROM THEM.
THEIR SCOPE AND JURISDICTION AND SCOPE OF REVIEW ON THIS IS REALLY TO COMMENT ON THE SITE PLAN SUBMITTED TO THEM FROM TRAFFIC TRAFFIC SAFETY PERSPECTIVE AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEIR GUIDANCE, WHICH I THINK IS CONSISTENT WITH WHAT THE APPLICANT HAS SAID.
AND, UH, WHILE HE ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THE PLANNING BOARD HAS A A LARGER SCOPE AND THAT WE HAVE TO ADDRESS ALL THE ISSUES UNDER SEEKER, UH, THAT IS, YOU KNOW, NOT PART
[00:05:01]
OF THEIR, THEIR CURRENT PURVIEW OR REVIEW AND BALANCING OF THE DIFFERENT ISSUES ON THE SITE RELATIVE TO TRAFFIC, INCLUDING THE DRIVEWAY LOCATION.YOU KNOW, HE, HE COULDN'T COMMENT OR SPECULATE ON ON SOME OF THAT AND THEY WON'T BE WEIGHING IN ON THAT FRONT IF, UM, THE PLANNING BOARD HAS ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE ACCIDENT HISTORY, UM, THE TRAFFIC ENGINEER THAT PREPARED THAT GORDON STANSBERRY IS ON THE LINE.
HE DOES HAVE ANOTHER, UM, MEETING TO ATTEND THIS, THIS EVENING.
THAT'S, UM, KIND OF BACK TO BACK.
AND SO IF, IF IT'S POSSIBLE, IF THERE WERE QUESTIONS THAT YOU WERE, UM, GOING TO RAISE REGARDING THAT REPORT, IF YOU COULD RAISE THEM EARLY ON IN THE MEETING THAT WAY, UM, WE COULD, UM, ALLOW GORDON TO GO ON AND, AND HELP WITH OTHER CLIENT.
UM, I MEAN, WOULD GORDON WANNA START WITH A, A BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE ACCIDENT HISTORY? UM, UH, YES.
UH, SO I WAS, IT WAS REQUESTED THAT I DO AN, AN ACCIDENT ANALYSIS FOR THE INTERSECTION OF, UM, SOUTHWEST BOULEVARD WITH HEALTH ROAD.
UH, WHAT WE DID WAS THE, THE STANDARD, UH, THREE YEAR PERIOD.
UH, WE REQUESTED ACCIDENT DATA FROM DOT FOR THE MOST, UH, CURRENT THREE YEARS AVAILABLE.
UH, THEY PROVIDED DATA FROM NOVEMBER, 2017 TO OCTOBER, 2020.
UH, IN THAT TIME THERE WERE FIVE TOTAL, UH, ACCIDENTS AT THE INTERSECTION.
UH, ONE OVERTAKING ACCIDENT, UH, WHICH WERE, WHICH INVOLVED AN EASTBOUND VEHICLE WITH A VEHICLE TURNING RIGHT ONTO HEALTH'S ROAD.
UH, ONE SIDESWIPE ACCIDENT, WHICH WAS, UH, ONE EASTBOUND, ONE WESTBOUND VEHICLE.
SO DIDN'T ACTUALLY HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE INTERSECTION OR TURNING MOVEMENTS.
UH, ONE FIXED OBJECT ACCIDENT, WHICH WAS, UH, A SINGLE VEHICLE ACCIDENT, UH, WESTBOUND VEHICLE GOING OFF THE ROAD.
AND THEN TWO, UH, DEER ACCIDENTS.
SO OF THE, UH, FIVE ACCIDENTS ONLY, UH, TWO OF THEM INVOLVED MORE THAN ONE VEHICLE.
UM, BASED ON THE TRAFFIC COUNTS THAT HAVE BEEN COLLECTED, UH, WE CALCULATE THE, UH, INTER INTERSECTION ACCIDENT RATE, UH, WHICH IS BELOW THE STATEWIDE AVERAGE FOR A SIMILAR TYPE INTERSECTION.
UH, THEREFORE THIS WOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED A HIGH ACCIDENT INTERSECTION IN ANY WAY.
UM, AND THERE'S NO INDICATION, UM, BASED ON THE FACT THAT THERE'S NO TURNING MOVEMENT RELATED ACCIDENTS, THAT THE ANGLE OF THE INTERSECTION, UH, IS CONTRIBUTING TO ANY SAFETY CONCERN.
THAT'S, UH, THAT'S ABOUT THE, UH, THE, THE QUICK OF IT.
UH, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
CAN YOU CLARIFY FOR THE GROUP, UH, WHAT DATA IS USED TO GENERATE THE ACCIDENT REPORTS? OBVIOUSLY SOMEBODY'S NOT STANDING OUT THERE MONITORING 24 7.
IS THAT ONLY ACCIDENTS FOR WHICH A POLICE REPORT IS FILED, OR, UM, WHERE DOES THAT DATA COME FROM? YES, IT, IT'S, UH, UH, THE, UH, NEAR STATE DOT MAINTAINS THE, UH, ACCIDENT DATABASE FOR THE STATE.
UH, IT'S NOT JUST STATE ROADS.
YOU CAN, YOU CAN REQUEST DATA FOR ANY, UH, ANY LOCAL ROAD.
UM, THEY PROVIDE A, UH, AN ACCIDENT REPORT.
UH, WHAT WE GET IS WHAT'S, UH, CALLED THE ACCIDENT VERBAL DESCRIPTION REPORT.
UH, IT'S FROM THE ACCIDENT LOCATION INFORMATION SYSTEM THAT DOT MAINTAINS.
UM, SO ANYTHING, UH, NON-REPORTABLE, UH, PROPERTY DAMAGE INJURY OR FATALITY ACCIDENTS, UH, THAT HAVE HAD A, A POLICE REPORT FILED SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THAT DATA.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE TRAFFIC EXPERT? CAN WE GET A COPY OF THAT REPORT? WE WERE NEVER GIVEN A COPY OF THAT REPORT.
GO GORDON, ON, ON THAT REPORT ANALYSIS, WAS THAT ALL VEHICLE THAT YOU HAD? WAS THERE PEDESTRIANS INVOLVED OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT? UM, IF THERE WAS A PEDESTRIAN ACCIDENT THAT INVOLVES A, A VEHICLE, UH, WITH A PEDESTRIAN, UH, THAT WOULD BE A REPORTED ACCIDENT THAT WE WOULD SEE.
SO THERE HAVE NOT BEEN ANY, UH, PEDESTRIAN RELATED ACCIDENTS AT THAT INTERSECTION IN THE LAST THREE YEARS.
IF I MAY INTERJECT, I BELIEVE SOMEONE ASKED TO, WHETHER OR NOT THE REPORT HAS BEEN PROVIDED, I'LL LET TARA CONFIRM THIS, BUT I BELIEVE IT WAS SENT ON FRIDAY PER THE BOARD'S REQUEST, AND IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN PROPERLY SUBMITTED, BUT I'LL LET TARA CONFIRM THAT.
WE SUBMITTED IT BY EMAIL TO SARAH ON FRIDAY.
UM, ALONG WITH SOME OTHER INFORMATION, UM, PERTAINING TO O OTHER ITEMS THAT WERE RAISED BY THE PLANNING BOARD, UM, SPECIFICALLY THE, THE PREFERENCE OF THE BERM OVER THE, UM, EXISTING TREES.
AND, UM, WE ALSO INCLUDED, UH, ALTHOUGH IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU RECEIVED A COPY OF IT, UM, THE, THE EMAIL FROM SDOT, UM, AND THEIR DETERMINATION.
SO THERE WERE A FEW THINGS IN THERE, UM, INCLUDING A, UM, OUR RESPONSE, UM,
[00:10:01]
MR. ARI'S RESPONSE TO THE PLANNING BOARD'S, UM, QUESTIONS ABOUT THE ZONING AS WELL AS SOME OTHER HIGH PRIORITY, UM, ITEMS THAT HAVE BEEN RAISED AND, UM, OVER THE COURSE OF OUR SEVERAL MEETINGS.SO, UM, I HOPE, I HOPE THAT WE, THAT SARAH DID RECEIVE THAT.
I UNDERSTAND MAYBE, UM, THERE, THERE MIGHT HAVE BEEN OVERLAP THERE, BUT HOPEFULLY IT WAS RECEIVED.
TARA, I HAVE A, THE EMAIL RIGHT HERE AND IT'S A FORWARD FROM YOU AND WE HAVE THE LETTER FROM YOU, THE LETTER STATING THE, UM, PIECES OF INFORMATION THAT'D BE FOLLOWING.
WE HAVE THE LETTER FROM THE LAW FIRM, WE HAVE THE PICTURES OF THE BERM, AND WE HAVE THE INFORMATION FROM THE DOT.
IT WAS FOUR TOTAL ATTACHMENTS.
THERE IS NO ATTACHMENT OF THE, UH, EXIT REPORTER ANALYSIS.
I WAS JUST GONNA SAY THE SAME THING.
I THINK THAT THERE MAY BE ONE ATTACHMENT MISSING 'CAUSE YOUR LIST HAD FIVE ON IT.
THAT, UM, MUST HAVE BEEN LEFT OFF AT THE ATTACHMENTS AND I'LL BE GLAD TO PROVIDE ONE.
I DO HAVE A, UM, I COULD PULL IT UP ON THE SCREEN NOW.
I KNOW OBVIOUSLY I'VE MISSED THE MARK WITH YOUR, UM, DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSION, BUT I DO HAVE A, UM, THE DETAILS OF THAT ACCIDENT REPORT, UM, THAT I COULD PULL UP PRETTY EASILY IF YOU'D LIKE TO PUT EYES ON IT RIGHT NOW.
HOW PAGES IS IT? I BELIEVE IT'S, UM, THERE IS A SUMMARY TABLE THAT SUMMARIZES THE FIVE ACCIDENTS.
YEAH, I MEAN, IF YOU COULD, I MEAN, I THINK THAT THE SUMMARY WAS PRETTY GOOD FOR, I MEAN, BECAUSE THERE WERE, SO THERE'S ONLY FIVE.
SO IF WE, IF, I MEAN, IF YOU WANNA PUT THAT ON THE SCREEN AND WE CAN LOOK YEAH, LEMME GO AHEAD AND PUT IT UP.
UM, JUST SO WE COVER THAT BASE.
YEAH, REALLY THE, UH, THE KEY PART OF THE, OF THE ACCIDENT ANALYSIS REALLY IS THAT THERE ARE ONLY TWO, TWO VEHICLE ACCIDENTS.
UM, THE, THE MAJORITY 60%, UH, THREE OUTTA THE FIVE WERE SINGLE VEHICLE ACCIDENTS.
UH, AND, AND NONE OF THEM WERE, WELL, ONLY ONE WAS RELATED TO A TURNING MOVEMENT WITH THAT, UH, ONE OVERTAKING ACCIDENT.
WHAT DOES PDO STAND FOR? UH, PROPERTY DAMAGE ONLY.
UH, PDO IS PROPERTY DAMAGE ONLY.
WE GET A CHANCE TO TO READ ALL OF THAT? YES.
AND I, I WOULD LIKE TO MENTION, UM, THAT I DID REFERENCE MY, UM, A COPY OF MY EMAIL AND IT, IT DOES APPEAR THAT THE ACCIDENT REVIEW WAS LISTED ON THE EMAIL THAT I SENT TO SARAH ON FRIDAY.
SO, UM, I APOLOGIZE IF THAT GOT LEFT OFF AT SOME POINT.
UM, IN BETWEEN, UH, MY SENDING IT, UH, BUT IT WAS LISTED ON THAT EMAIL AS AN ATTACHMENT.
I'VE HAD THAT HAPPEN BEFORE WHERE I TRY TO, UH, OPEN ATTACHMENTS AND I FORGET TO SCROLL DOWN.
UM, THAT'S POSSIBLY WHAT COULD HAVE HAPPENED.
I FORWARDED WHATEVER I GOT FROM TARA, I FORWARDED DIRECTLY TO YOU GUYS.
UM, ANYBODY ON THE PLANNING BOARD THINK WE, I GUESS TO, TO KIND OF CIRCLE BACK TO MY QUESTION EARLIER, THINK THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE WE NEED BEFORE MOVING ON TO THE NEXT STEP IN THIS PROCESS? NO.
SO AS WE KNOW THE NEXT STEP STEP IS A SECRET DETERMINATION.
I CAN, UH, I'M JUST GONNA INTERRUPT FOR ONE SECOND.
UH, IF THAT'S OKAY, THEN I'M GONNA DROP OUT OF THE CALL
[00:15:01]
TO UH, GO TO MY OTHER MEETING.UH, TARA, IF YOU WANT TO TEXT ME IF THERE'S ANY, UH, QUESTIONS I CAN HOP BACK ON AFTER MY MEETING IF YOU GUYS ARE STILL TALKING.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH EVERYONE.
AND TARA GORDON JUST SENT US, I CHECKED MY EMAIL AGAIN, IT WASN'T ON THE ATTACHMENT WHETHER IT GOT DROPPED OR WHATEVER.
SO FOR THE RECORD, WE MAKE SURE WE HAVE IT.
SARAH, YOU CAN CHECK YOURS, BUT THE ONE YOU FORWARDED, IT WAS NOT ALL THE FOUR ATTACHMENTS, BUT THE FIFTH ONE WASN'T ON THERE.
I'M CHECKING RIGHT NOW AND IT, THE, THE ONE I GOT FROM TARA HAD SIX ATTACHMENTS, MAYBE ONE WAS THE LOGO OR SOMETHING, BUT ACCORDING, ACCORDING, I FORWARDED WHAT I GOT.
SO CAN YOU MAYBE TRY AND RESEND IT AGAIN OR JUST RESEND THAT ONE ATTACHMENT? 'CAUSE SOMETHING HAPPENED, I DUNNO.
I'LL TRY AND FORWARD IT AGAIN.
I MEAN, MINE SPECIFICALLY SAYS FOR ATTACHMENTS.
I WONDER IF IT'S, I WONDER IF THERE WERE SO MANY ATTACHMENTS THAT IT ONLY SENT A CERTAIN NUMBER.
IT COULD BE, I MEAN, IF IF THERE THE FILES WERE TOO LARGE MIGHT HAVE CUT IT OFF WHEN IT SWITCHES FROM ONE EMAIL SYSTEM.
I'M, I'M FORWARDING IT TO YOU RIGHT NOW.
AGAIN, IT SAYS THAT IT WENT THROUGH, HAVEN'T GOTTEN ANYTHING YET.
WHILE WE'RE WAITING, PERHAPS DO WE WANNA, I MEAN, I THINK DR.
DREW, UH, HAD PREPARED A, A DECENT SUMMARY THAT HE HAD SENT OUT AS OUR MEMO.
I DON'T KNOW IF MAYBE WE WANNA HAVE HIM RECAP WHERE WE'RE AT WITH THE PART TWO.
IT SAYS ATTACHMENTS THOUGH, SARAH.
I DID GET THE ACCIDENT HISTORY REPORT FROM TARA IN HER INITIAL EMAIL.
HOW ABOUT, CAN YOU SEPARATE IT AND FORWARD IT TO US THAT WAY? AND, AND DREW, CAN YOU, UH, START WITH THAT SUMMARY PLEASE? YEP.
WELL, AND I'LL JUST, UH, I HAVE MY MEMO HERE, BUT BOTTOM LINE IS, AS YOU KNOW, THE NEXT STEP OF THE PROCESS IS SEEKER.
YOU'VE BEEN THROUGH IT DOZENS OF TIMES.
UH, BASICALLY THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED THEIR PART ONE, WE ASKED THEM FOR A FULLY AF THEY DID THAT FOR US.
BASICALLY, WE DID A COORDIN INTERVIEW.
WE'VE ESTABLISHED OURSELVES AS A LEAD AGENCY.
WE WENT THROUGH ONE OF THE MEETINGS, WE WENT THROUGH A PART TWO THAT WE WORKED ON.
WE WENT BACK AND FORTH THE PART TWO OF THE AF YOU IDENTIFY, FIRST OF ALL, FOR EXAMPLE, LIKE THE FIRST ONE, IMPACT TO LAND.
YOU SEE PROJECTS GONNA HAVE AN IMPACT TO LAND.
AND THEN YOU GO THROUGH THE SUB-QUESTIONS.
THE SUB-QUESTIONS ARE BASED UPON THRESHOLDS.
FOR EXAMPLE, AND I'M JUST USING AN EXAMPLE HERE, THE FIRST QUESTION UNDER IMPACT OF LAND IS THE PROPOSED ACTION MAY INVOLVE CONSTRUCTION ON LAND WHERE DEPTH TO WATER TABLE IS LESS THAN THREE FEET.
WE CHECK THAT BOX, UH, BASICALLY MODERATE TO LARGE IMPACT BECAUSE THE EAF SHOWS THAT THERE ARE HIGH GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS ON THE SITE.
SO WHAT YOU DO IS EVERY QUESTION THAT YOU ANSWER AS POTENTIALLY MODERATE TO LARGE, AND AGAIN, THEY'RE JUST THRESHOLD LEVELS, HAVE HAD PEOPLE ARGUE THAT WELL, AUTOMATICALLY YOU HAVE TO DO AN IMPACT STATEMENT.
IF SOMETHING IS MODERATE TO LARGE, THAT'S NOT THE CASE.
WHAT THE SECRET LAW SAYS AND SAYS RIGHT AT THE TOP OF THE FORM IS THAT BASICALLY IF YOU CHECK SOMETHING AS MODERATE TO LARGE, IT'S A KIND OF AN IDEA THAT THESE THINGS COULD CAUSE AN IMPACT THAT YOU HAVE TO EVALUATE WHETHER THOSE, THAT THAT IS REALLY A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT FOR THIS PROJECT.
FOR EXAMPLE, I DO A LOT OF LANDFILL WORK.
I USED TO DO A LOT OF LAND WORK.
AND WHEN YOU CHECK THE BOTTOM WATER CONDITION, OBVIOUSLY THAT'S SOMETHING THAT USUALLY ENDS UP WITH ADDRESSING AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT BECAUSE IT CAN BE A VERY SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON THE DESIGN OF A, OF A, UH, A LANDFILL OR OTHER THINGS THAT ARE IMPACTED BY HIGH GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS.
IN THE CASE OF THIS PROJECT, WE TYPICALLY, FOR A CONSTRUCTION OF A, OF A, UH, UH, BUILDING WITH NO, WITH NO BASEMENTS, WE WOULD SAY, GEEZ, THAT'S REALLY NOT GONNA HAVE AN IMPACT AT ALL BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE A BASEMENT, YOU DON'T HAVE ISSUES THAT YOU WOULD DEAL WITH OR, OR OTHER PROBLEMS CAUSED BY HIGH GROUNDWORK.
THE ONLY ISSUE THAT RISES HERE, AND AGAIN WE CAN GET INTO THESE ISSUES, BUT I TALKED ABOUT IT BEFORE, WAS FOR EXAMPLE, THAT ONE, THIS PROJECT IS IN AN AREA THAT DOESN'T HAVE SEWERS.
SO THEY HAVE TO DO A SEPTIC SYSTEM.
[00:20:01]
WHEN YOU HAVE HIGH GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS IN A SEPTIC SYSTEM, USUALLY GET INTO A RAISED MOUND SYSTEM OR A SAND FILTER SYSTEM, WHICH CAUSES IMPACTS AND WHATEVER.THE APPLICANT HAS STATED, AND AGAIN, I'M JUST USING ONE EXAMPLE HERE, THERE WERE, I THINK THERE WERE ABOUT EIGHT OR NINE QUESTIONS OR MORE THAT WE, THAT POTENTIALLY MODERATE TO TO LARGE, POTENTIALLY MODERATE TO LARGE.
WE HAVE TO ANALYZE THOSE THINGS.
SO, UM, ONE OF, LIKE I SAID, I STARTED ANALYZING THAT SAY, WELL, IS THE SEPTIC SYSTEM GONNA BE A PROBLEM? TARA RESPONDED THAT THEY LOOKED INTO THAT THEY'RE DOING A MOUND SYSTEM.
I WAS A LITTLE CONCERNED, UH, BECAUSE WITH A MOUND SYSTEM YOU HAVE TO HAVE A DISCHARGE LINE.
WHERE'S THAT DISCHARGE LINE GONNA GO TO? BECAUSE IF YOU HAVE HIGH GROUNDWATER, IT'S HARD FOR THE WASTEWATER TO GET BACK INTO THE GROUND AND TEND, IT'LL GET INTO HIGHWAY CULVERTS AND WHATEVER.
THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS I EVEN WENT 30 YEARS AGO WHEN I WAS WORKING WITH, UH, BACK IN ALBANY.
UH, BASICALLY THAT WAS ONE OF THE CONCERNS WE HAD WITH THESE TYPE OF SYSTEMS. SO AGAIN, WE HAD TO LOOK AT THAT A LITTLE BIT IN THE FACT THAT ARE WE COMFORTABLE THAT THIS IS NOT GONNA CAUSE A CAUSE A PROBLEM BECAUSE OF HIGH GROUNDWATER? SO THAT'S THE KIND OF WAY YOU DO THIS.
THE, THE NEXT QUESTION ON HERE THAT CAME UP POTENTIALLY LARGE WAS THERE'S, THERE'S HIGH ROCK CONDITIONS HERE.
THEY'RE NOT PUTTING, I MEAN, UH, UH, UH, UH, UH, BASEMENT.
SO I BELIEVE YOU CHECKED THE BOX TEAR.
AND REMIND ME YOU WON'T BE DOING ANY BLASTING HERE BECAUSE OF HIGH ROCK CONDITIONS, BASICALLY.
'CAUSE THEN WE WOULD'VE TO GET IN THE NOISE ISSUES.
YOU, YOU ARE NOT DOING ANY BLASTING AT THIS SITE, RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT.
THIS SLAB ON GRADE, UM, I BELIEVE THAT THE, UM, BEDROCK IS MAYBE AN AVERAGE OF FOUR FEET BELOW THE SURFACE.
AND, UM, OUR FINGERS BARELY REACHED THAT DEPTH.
SO, UM, WE WOULD NOT ANTICIPATE NEEDING TO BLAST IN THIS AREA.
SO THAT WAS, THAT WAS A, YOU KNOW, I FELT COMFORTABLE WITH THAT ONE WITH THE FACT THAT ABOUT BLASTING, SO I DON'T WANNA GO THROUGH ALL THESE AGAIN.
I KIND OF LISTED 'EM IN MY, UH, MEMO TO YOU SAYING THESE WERE THE THINGS THAT WERE OF ISSUES THAT YOU'VE EITHER BROUGHT UP OR WHATEVER.
ARE THERE HAVE YOUR CONCERNS OR DO YOU HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION TO DECIDE WHETHER THESE ARE SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS OR NOT? SOME OF THEM ARE A LITTLE MORE, UH, ESO NOT AS EASY TO ANALYZE.
I MEAN, COMMUNITY CHARACTER IS ALWAYS A DIFFICULT ISSUE.
AND WE HAVE A, AND WE HAVE THE SOUTHERN HAMBURG OVERLAY TO HELP US WITH THAT ISSUE.
UM, WE HAVE ISSUES LIKE, UM, UH, THE, UM, THE REMOVAL OF THE TREES ON THE SITE.
UH, THE OVERLAY DISTRICT SAYS NOT TO REMOVE TREES, MINIMIZE TREE LOSS.
AND AT THE FIRST MEETING WE THOUGHT THAT THE SITE WAS GONNA BE COMPLETELY CLEARED.
NOW WE HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE INFORMATION.
WE HAVE INFORMATION FROM UM, TERRA SAYING THEY'RE GONNA TRY TO SAVE SOME OF THE TREES ON THE ONE SIDE, YOU KNOW, IS THAT ENOUGH? AND THEN WE HAVE ALSO INPUT FROM THE CONSERVATION ADVISORY BOARD WHO SAID, THESE ARE NOT SIGNIFICANT TREES.
THERE'S NOTHING SIGNIFICANT ABOUT THESE TREES.
THEY ARE TREES, BUT THEY'RE NOT SIGNIFICANT.
SO AGAIN, WE HAVE QUITE A BIT OF INFORMATION.
ARE THERE THINGS YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT MORE? I I, I, I READ THEM IN THERE.
UH, AGAIN, TARA SUBMITTED ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND THEY'RE A CONSULTANT ON PEDESTRIAN SAFETY.
I MEAN, IF
SO, YOU KNOW, WE GOT SOME REPORTS ABOUT GAPS IN THE TRAFFIC AND IS THERE ENOUGH GAPS FOR PEOPLE TO, FROM THAT LARGE SUBDIVISION ACROSS THE STREET, IT'S A LARGE SUBDIVISION THAT PEOPLE WILL TRY TO CROSS THAT STREET TO GET TO THE DOLLAR GENERAL.
AND IF YOU RIDE UP AND DOWN THERE, THE OTHER USERS ON THAT SIDE OF THE STREET THERE REALLY NO PEDESTRIAN USERS, NO ONE'S WALKING TO THOSE FACILITIES.
UM, IT WAS A BIG ISSUE WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT IT WITH, UM, TIM HORTON'S, BUT WE FELT COMFORTABLE FOR THE FACT THAT ALL THE PEOPLE, MOST OF THE PEOPLE ON THAT SIDE OF THE ROAD, AND THEY'RE, AND THEY'RE GONNA WALK THERE.
REMEMBER ALL THE COMMENTS WE HAD ON TIM HORTON'S ABOUT THAT.
UM, SO AGAIN, I, I'VE KIND OF SUMMARIZED, BUT I'M LOOKING FOR YOU GUYS AS PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS TO TELL ME ARE THERE ISSUES YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT A LITTLE BIT MORE TO MAKE SURE YOU HAVE ENOUGH THAT YOU UNDERSTAND THE ISSUE AND COULD DETERMINE WHETHER IT MAY HAVE AN IMPACT OR BE SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT, MAYBE AN IMPACT.
SO I'M TURNING OVER TO YOU GUYS QUESTIONS.
THOSE ARE JUST EXAMPLES OF HOW WE HAVE TO DISCUSS THIS AND SAY, IS IT REAL? DO YOU HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION TO MAKE THAT DECISION? OH, I MEAN, I THINK THERE'S TWO WAYS WE CAN DO THIS.
I, WE CAN MAKE A RESOLUTION A, A REGULAR YES OR NO RESOLUTION, AND THEN DO A POLLING VOTE OR WE CAN PULL THE BOARD AHEAD OF TIME AS FAR AS
[00:25:01]
POSITIVE OR NEGATIVE DECKS.UH, HOW DOES, DOES ANYBODY HAVE AN OPINION ON WHICH WAY THEY'D PREFER TO DO IT? UM, BILL FIRST, FIRST OF ALL, DID, DID I, BECAUSE FOR THE RECORD, DID I, I ARTICULATED IN MY MEMO, I WENT THROUGH THE PART TWO WITH THE ONES WE WENT THROUGH AND SAID, THESE ARE THE THINGS THAT WERE MODERATE TO LARGE IMPACTS.
DID I MISS ANYTHING? I TALKED ABOUT SOME OF THE, THE MODERATE TO LARGE IMPACTS OR DEPTH OF GROUNDWATER.
TALKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT REMOVAL OF VEGETATION POTENTIALLY CAUSING EROSION AND CAMMIES ON THE LINE, RIGHT? SHE COULD ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS SHE WOULD HAVE YOU HAVE ABOUT THAT.
WE TALKED ABOUT THE OVERLAY ZONING REQUIREMENTS, WHICH INCLUDE MINIMIZATION OF TREE LOSS.
AND THAT'S IN THAT SECTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ZONING.
REMEMBER, IT'S NOT ONLY ACCORDANCE WITH THE C TWO ZONE, BUT WE ALSO HAVE AN OVERLAY DISTRICT, THE AESTHETIC IMPACTS, WHICH RELATES TO THE RURAL CHARACTER.
AND I KNOW, UH, TARA'S BEEN TRYING TO ADDRESS THAT THROUGH CHANGES IN THE, IN THE BUILDING, A NEW LANDSCAPE BURN, THINGS LIKE THAT.
UH, AND THAT GOES TO THE TREE ISSUE.
THERE WAS THE PEDESTRIAN SAFETY ISSUE, THE TRAFFIC SAFETY ISSUE, WHICH YOU'VE GOT A LOT ON.
THEN THERE WAS LIGHTING IMPACTS.
UM, I'M TRYING TO REVIEW MY NOTES.
THESE ARE GONNA BE DARK SKY COMPLIANT LIGHTS.
EVERYBODY IS COMFORTABLE WITH INFORMATION ON LIGHTING.
UM, THEN WE TALKED ABOUT ROCK REMOVAL ALREADY IN THE NOISE.
AND THEN THERE'S THE COMMUNITY PLANS, WHICH IS THE ISSUE OF THE, REALLY THE OVERLAY DISTRICT.
'CAUSE THE COMP PLAN IS GENERAL AND
AND THEN THE, UH, DENSITY AND SIZE OF PROJECT RELATES TO THE SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE ISSUE.
AND THAT RELATES TO, YOU KNOW, NOT HAVING A SEWER THERE.
UM, AND THEN THERE'S ALWAYS THE THINGS LIKE, UM, SECONDARY GROWTH IN INDUCEMENT AND THEN ARCHITECTURAL SCALE.
WE'VE TALKED ABOUT AR ARCHITECTURAL, THE BUILDING A LOT.
AND THEN, AND THEN THE IMPACTS, UH, TO THE, THE LANDSCAPE OF THE SITE.
THAT'S IN THAT LAST QUESTION ABOUT THE GENERAL LANDSCAPE, THE EXISTING LANDSCAPE OF THE SITE THAT HAS TO DO WITH THE TREES.
SO I TRIED TO GO THROUGH THAT LIST AND SUMMARIZE.
THOSE WERE THE PART TWO THINGS.
THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF INFORMATION PRESENTED.
I DON'T THINK WE MISSED ANY OF THOSE ISSUES.
THERE'S BEEN INFORMATION SUBMITTED ON THOSE.
UM, WE DIDN'T ASK FOR NOISE STUDY BECAUSE AGAIN, THIS PROJECT'S NOT GONNA GENERATE NOISE.
AND, AND I WAS WORRIED AND, AND THEY'VE STATED ON THE RECORD THAT THEY'RE NOT DOING ANY BLASTING DURING CONSTRUCTION THAT WE'D HAVE TO MINIMIZE.
SO DID I MISS ANYTHING? DO YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT ANY OF THOSE ISSUES? AND I THINK WE NEED TO HEAR FROM THE PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS.
WELL, DREW, YES, DREW AND, AND MEMBERS.
JUST TO CLARIFY, WHEN I WAS TALKING ABOUT PEDESTRIAN SAFETY, I ALSO MEANT, AND MAYBE IT'S NOT INCLUDED,
WERE YOU PLANNING ON PUTTING A BICYCLE RACK AT THIS, ON THIS SITE? OR LIKE IF CHILDREN OR SOMEBODY CAME WITH A BICYCLE, I MEAN, ADULTS RIDE BICYCLES TOO ALONG THAT SOUTHWESTERN DURING, YOU KNOW, GREAT GOOD WEATHER.
AND I WAS WONDERING, I MEAN, BECAUSE BICYCLE TRAFFIC WILL BE ON THAT SOUTHWESTERN, WELL, IF THE, IF A BICYCLE RACK STANDS BETWEEN US AND UM, PLAN APPROVAL, WE'LL PROVIDE A BICYCLE RACK, WE WOULD NOT HAVE ANY, WE WOULD NOT OPPOSE DOING THAT AT ALL.
WE COULD PROVIDE A BICYCLE RACK.
WELL, I JUST KNOW, I JUST KNOW, UM, KAREN, FROM BEING AROUND THAT AREA ONCE IN A WHILE, THAT THERE'S A LOT OF BIKE TRAFFIC THAT GOES BETWEEN LAKEVIEW AREA AND THEN THROUGH THAT AREA TO GO TO DIFFERENT SP SPOTS, CERTAIN AREAS.
'CAUSE IT'S A LONG STRETCH OF, UM, ROADWAY AND, UH, I BELIEVE SOME OF THESE PEOPLE WILL CROSS SOUTHWESTERN WITH THEIR BICYCLES, BE IT CHILDREN OR ADULTS, MAKES A DIFFERENCE.
I, I JUST TURNED THAT PART OF PEDESTRIAN IN MY OWN WAY.
I DIDN'T KNOW IF THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS CONSIDERED OR WAS THAT PEDESTRIAN, JUST PEOPLE WALKING TO AND FROM THIS, AND I DON'T WANNA SPEAK FOR TARA, BUT I IMAGINE TARA, IF THEY DON'T WANT A BICYCLE RACK 'CAUSE THEY DON'T WANNA INDUCE OR ATTRACT ANY TYPE OF BICYCLE, YOU'RE PROBABLY PROBABLY WILLING TO SAY THAT YOU CAN MAKE THE COMMITMENT THAT THERE WON'T BE ONE.
I'M WILLING TO HAVE THAT AS A SITE PLAN APPROVAL CONDITION IF YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE IT A CONDITIONAL, UM, ITEM ON SITE PLAN APPROVAL.
EITHER WAY, UM, THAT THE BOARD WOULD PREFER, WE CAN ACCOMMODATE THAT.
NOW, ONE THING I DIDN'T MENTION, AND I I I ALWAYS HATE BRINGING IT UP, BUT I HAVE TO, THIS IS AN UNLISTED ACTION.
WE'VE DETERMINED IT IS AN UNLISTED ACTION.
I HATE BRINGING IT UP 'CAUSE I'M NOT, BUT YOU CAN ISSUE A NEGATIVE.
DON'T GO THERE, ANDREW COMES WITH ISSUES.
[00:30:01]
A POSITIVE DECK.SO, AND I SEE MR. GUY, I HATE CONDITIONED EGG DECK, BUT I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE YOU UNDERSTAND THAT YOU CAN ISSUE A CONDITIONED EGG DECK.
WE'D SPEND ANOTHER COUPLE MEETINGS IF WE WERE GOING TO GIVE CONDITIONAL NECK DECK AND MAKE SURE THAT IT'S DONE CORRECTLY.
THERE'S FILING REQUIREMENTS, THERE'S THINGS LIKE THAT IS, AND I AGREE, MOST ATTORNEYS DO NOT WANT TO CONDITION NEC.
IT, IT JUST PRESENTS TOO MUCH, TOO MUCH PROBLEMS. UM, SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE YOU UNDERSTOOD THAT, THAT I DIDN'T GIVE YOU ADVICE.
YOU CAN DO, IF YOU LOOK AT THE PART THREE FORM, WHICH I'M SURE YOU HAVE FOR AN UN UNLISTED ACTION, YOU HAVE THREE CHOICES, NEGATIVE DECK, CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE DECK, OR A POSITIVE DECK.
SO, SORRY, I'LL, I'LL MUTE MYSELF NOW, BUT I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE YOU UNDERSTOOD.
YEAH, LISTEN, WE'RE, I'M SORRY, BUT, UM, DREW MADE A GOOD POINT, NO DISRESPECT, BUT IN YOUR LETTER I'VE READ IT QUITE EXTENSIVELY.
WHERE DID YOU GET THE INDICATION THAT WE THOUGHT THIS WAS A TYPE ONE ACTION? WELL, USUALLY IN EVERY MUNICIPAL BOARD IS DIFFERENT.
EVERY PLANNING BOARD'S DIFFERENT.
BUT THE, THE PART TWO FULL FORM IS TYPICALLY ONLY REQUESTED, IN MY EXPERIENCE, AT LEAST DOWN IN CHATAUQUA COUNTY WHERE I DO THE BULK OF MY PRACTICE, BUT ALSO SOME PARTS OF ERIE COUNTY.
UM, WHEN THERE'S A TYPE ONE OR A TYPE TWO ACTION, THE BOARDS IN THEIR PURVIEW CAN REQUEST A FULL EFA PART TWO ON AN UNLISTED ACTION, BUT IT'S NOT A REQUIREMENT.
SO I WAS NOT A PART OF THE INITIAL MEETINGS WHEN THIS MIGHT HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED AND WHEN IT WAS REQUESTED.
SO THAT WAS PART OF THE INQUIRY.
IT WAS, UH, BECAUSE WHEN YOU, YOU PUT IN HERE, WE FIRST, WE OBJECT TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THIS WAS A TYPE ONE ACCIDENT OR SEEKER, WHICH IS UNLISTED.
AND I JUST WAS CURIOUS, SO, YEP, NO, THAT WAS THE REASON.
I JUST, BECAUSE I WASN'T A PART OF THAT, I WANTED TO BE CLEAR.
AND I DON'T WANNA SPEAK FOR TARA.
SHE WASN'T A HUNDRED PERCENT SURE.
SO WE JUST WANTED TO MAKE OUR POSITION CLEAR KNOWN ON THE RECORD.
AND THAT WAS GOING TO BE MY NEXT QUESTION.
AND, UM, BUT I, I UNDERSTAND THE DIRECTION.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD? OKAY, JENNIFER, UM, JUST A QUICK QUESTION.
I, I KNOW I, UM, CHATTED WITH YOU A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THIS, BUT JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM WHAT THE WEIGHT OF EVIDENCE REQUIREMENT IS ON THE PLANNING BOARD, UM, TO ISSUE A NEG DECK AND WHAT OUR RESPONSIBILITY IS THERE.
WELL, FIRST AND FOREMOST, FOR A NEGATIVE DECK, YOU HAVE TO, AND I'LL ALSO INVITE DREW TO ADD ON IF I MISCONSTRUE ANYTHING.
BUT YOU HAVE TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS FOR A NEGATIVE DECK.
IF YOU HAVE ANY MODERATE TO SIGNIFICANT, SIGNIFICANT MODERATE TO SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS BASED ON YOUR EAF, THEN YOU MAY NOT MEET THE REQUIREMENT FOR A NEGATIVE DECK BASED ON YOUR OPINIONS.
SO IF YOU HAVE ANYTHING OUTSTANDING, OR IF YOU STILL HAVE MODERATE TO SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS, THEN THAT MAY ANSWER YOUR QUESTION FOR YOU.
IS THAT WHAT YOU WERE LOOKING FOR? YEAH, IT, IT, IT'S A DIFFICULT ISSUE.
UM, THE SECRET LAW WAS WRITTEN, AND I'VE BEEN DOING IT FOR 40 YEARS, AND I, AND I'VE HELPED WRITE SOME OF THE SECTIONS IN THE NEW SEEKER LAW.
THE, THE LAW SAYS THAT, AS YOU KNOW, I'VE STATED IT ON THE RECORD, IF A PROJECT MAY HAVE THE IMPACT ON ENVIRONMENT, THE WORD IS MAY YOU ARE OBLIGATED TO ISSUE A POSITIVE DECLARATION IF THE PROJECT WILL NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT, AGAIN, THE WORD SIGNIFICANT HAS TO BE IN THERE, SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT, THEN YOU ISSUE A NEGATIVE DECLARATION.
IT TENDS TO BE HARDER, SUPPOSED TO BE HARDER TO ISSUE A NEG DECK THAN A, THAN A PO DECK.
BUT AGAIN, AS PLANNING BOARDS GET MORE SOPHISTICATED AND APPLICANTS DO A GOOD JOB OF PRESENTING INFORMATION, HAVING A CLEAR RECORD, BASICALLY SHOWING THAT WE TOOK A HARD LOOK, THEN THE RECORD IS CLEAR THAT WE CAN STATE THAT THE PRO PROJECT ISSUES A NEGATIVE DECLARATION.
AND I APPLAUD ADOPT RECORD THAT THERE IS INFORMATION ON THE RECORD IF YOU DECIDE TO ISSUE A NEG DECK.
BUT IT DOES BALANCE ON THE FACT THAT IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE HARDER TO ISSUE A NEG DECK.
THAT'S WHY YOU DO A LOT MORE WORK TO ISSUE A NEG DECK THAN A POSITIVE DECK.
IF YOU HAVE ANY CONCERNS, YOU BASICALLY ARE SUPPOSED TO DOWNSTATE NEW YORK, ALMOST EVERYTHING GOES PO DECK UPSTATE NEW YORK.
YOU KNOW WHY IT DOES THAT WAY.
BUT WE TEND TO ERR ON THE, ON THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION SIDE.
SO, UM, WE HAVE, UH, POSITIVE DECK PROJECTS IN THE PAST.
WE HAVE, UH, NEGATIVE DECKED A LOT OF PROJECTS IN THE PAST, BUT IT IS VERY SITE SPECIFIC.
YOU COULD TAKE A PROJECT, AN 8,000 SQUARE FOOT DOLLAR GENERAL IN A LOT OF COMMUNITIES IN CERTAIN SITES, AND THERE'S DOZENS OF SITE IN, IN, IN, IN, UH, HAMBURG THAT
[00:35:01]
YOU WOULD SAY, HEY, NO PROBLEM ISSUING AN EGG DECK THE RECORD THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU WITH VERY LITTLE INFORMATION, YOU COULD DO AN EGG DECK.THIS SITE JUST TURNED A LITTLE HARDER BECAUSE IT HAS ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH IT.
THE OVERLAY DISTRICT, THE LACK OF SUE, UH, IT MAKE A LOT EASIER IF THE ENTRANCE RAN OUT TO SOUTHWESTERN BECAUSE EVEN TARA SAID THAT IF YOU CAN PUT THE ENTRANCE OUT ON THE SOUTHWESTERN, YOU CAN PULL THE BUILDING A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY, SHAPE THE BUILDING ON THE SITE A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY.
SO IT IS ALWAYS SITE SPECIFIC AND THAT'S WHY FOR SOME COMMUNITIES THIS IS A HUGE PROJECT AND, AND, AND, AND HAS A LOT OF IMPACTS.
AND THIS HAS A LOT OF IMPACTS BECAUSE OF ITS LOCATION.
AND, AND, AND THE SITE ITSELF IS, IS A MORE DIFFICULT ISSUE.
UM, SO AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW IF I'VE HELPED WITH THAT.
IT, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S ALWAYS THE ISSUE YOU STRUGGLE WITH IS SECRET NECK DECK.
AND A MATTER OF FACT, ONE OF THE THINGS I ALWAYS TELL A LOT OF COMMUNITIES WILL JUST LOOK AT A PROJECT AND SAY WE'RE WE'RE GONNA TURN DOWN THE SITE PLAN.
WE DON'T LIKE THE SITE PLAN, BUT TECHNICALLY YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO DO SEEKER FIRST.
TYPICALLY NO ONE CHALLENGES WHEN SOMEONE TURNS DOWN A PROJECT AND NOT DOING SEEKER BECAUSE WHY ARE YOU GONNA CHALLENGE? BECAUSE YOU KNOW, OKAY, WE'RE FORCING THEM TO ISSUE A POS DECK THEN.
UM, BUT YOU KNOW, THE RULE IS YOU GOT A COMPLETE SEEKER BEFORE YOU MAKE A DECISION.
YOU KNOW, IN A
WE HAVE TO DO SEEKER, NOT A TYPE TWO ACTION WE GOTTA DO.
IT'S THE FIRST THING YOU HAVE TO DO.
AND YOU'VE DONE IT ON DOZENS AND DOZENS.
SOME OF YOU HAVE DONE IT ON THE BOARD LONGER.
YOU'VE DONE, I MEAN, I DON'T EVEN WANNA COUNT HOW MANY I'VE DONE.
SO AGAIN, I'M HERE TO HELP AND CAMMY'S ON THE LINE, SHE CAN ANSWER QUESTIONS ABOUT DRAINAGE AND OTHER STUFF.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S BEEN A BIG ISSUE WITH THIS PROJECT.
UM, WE'VE GOTTEN INPUT FROM THE DIFFERENT BOARDS.
I MEAN THE TRAFFIC SAFETY ADVISOR BOARD HAS WEIGHED IN, CONSERVATION BOARD HAS WEIGHED IN, BUT I REMINDED THE CONSERVATION TRAFFIC SAFETY BOARD, THE PLANNING BOARD HAS TO TAKE THE INFORMATION RECEIVED.
THEY'RE NOT THE BOARDS MAKING THE DECISION.
YOU MAKE THE DECISION IT'S MEMBERS AND SEE WHAT YOU GUYS ARE THINKING.
THAT, THAT'S ESSENTIALLY WHY I PROVIDED A DISCRETIONARY RESPONSE TO YOUR QUESTION, CAITLIN, IS IT'S DISCRETIONARY BASED ON EACH OF YOU.
SO IF YOU STILL FIND AT THE END THAT YOU HAVE SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS BASED ON THE FACTORS YOU'VE CONSIDERED, THEN YOU WOULD HAVE TO PAUSE AND OBJECT THE PROJECT.
AND IF I MAY INTERJECT, AND I APOLOGIZE, I DON'T WANNA CUT JENNIFER OFF AND MR. CHAIRMAN, IF I MAY, UM, AND I'M NOT BY ANY STRETCH OF THE IMAGINATION, UM, UM, ADVISING OR GIVING ANY REFERENCE TO THE PLANNING BOARD SPECIFICALLY, BUT I CAN SAY THAT THE DOLLAR GENERAL OR BROADWAY GROUP IN THIS APPLICATION, ALONG WITH THEIR OTHER APPLICATIONS, WHEN THEY PRESENT THE INFORMATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL, AS WELL AS FOR SEEKER REVIEW, THEY DO SO TO ADDRESS ALL YOUR QUESTIONS.
SO THERE COULD BE TO ESSENTIALLY FILL IN THE GAPS AND THE, THE STANDARD THEY'RE MEETING IS MAKING SURE THERE ARE NOT BOARD MEMBERS.
AGAIN, NOT YOU, ANY OF YOU PARTICULARLY, BUT AGAIN, THEIR GENERAL FORMAT IS TO MAKE SURE NO ONE'S MAKING JUST AN ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS DECISION AND THAT IS THE LEGAL STANDARD AND THAT THERE'S ACTUALLY CREDIBILITY OR SUBSTANCE BEHIND THEIR DECISION IF THEY ELECT TO ISSUE A POSITIVE DECK.
UM, AND MAKING SURE IT'S NOT USED JUST AS, UH, AS BEING SOMEONE BEING OF ONE OF THE CONSTRUCTIONIST OR PUT UP ROBLOX, THEY ACTUALLY HAVE TO HAVE A BASIS FOR THEIR DECISION.
SO THAT'S WHY THEY, THE DOLLAR GENERAL, IN MY OPINION AMONG MY, MY CLIENTS THAT ON MY LAND USE ISSUES, THEY DO A GOOD JOB OF TRYING TO PRESENT EVERYTHING IN THERE TO ADDRESS ALL THE CONCERNS.
SO HOPEFULLY WE DON'T HAVE THESE ISSUES.
AND AGAIN, EVERY PLANNING BOARD'S, UH, DIFFERENT AS WELL AS MR. RILEY SAID, EVERY SITE'S DIFFERENT.
UM, AND YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT SITE SPECIFIC.
YOU CAN'T JUST SAY, WELL, DOLLAR GENERAL'S GOOD THERE, THEN THEY HAVE TO BE GOOD THERE.
BUT I WILL SAY, AND UM, THERE'VE BEEN OVER 35, UH, DOLLAR GENERAL PROJECTS, UM, PRESENTED BY THIS PARTICULAR, UH, DEVELOPMENT GROUP.
AND THERE'S ONLY BEEN ONE POSITIVE DECLARATION, AND I BELIEVE THAT WAS IN GOWANA FOR VARIOUS REASONS, BUT THERE'S BEEN 34 WESTERN NEW YORK NEGATIVE DECLARATIONS.
AND I ATTRIBUTE TO THAT, TO THE WORK OF TARA AND THE OTHER DEVELOPERS.
'CAUSE THEY GO OUT OF THE WAY TO GET YOU EVERY SINGLE DOCUMENT THEY CAN DO, ADDRESS THESE CONCERNS.
UM, AND AGAIN, AS I HIGHLIGHT MY LETTER AND I DON'T WANNA GO TO IT, UM, WHATEVER, UH, WHENEVER THE GOAL LINE GETS MOVED AND YOU WANT SOMETHING MORE, THEY'RE WILLING TO GO GET IT.
WE'RE HERE FOR A REFERENCE AND RESOURCE.
UM, BUT UM, I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT BEFORE YOU GUYS MOVE FORWARD WITH YOUR DECISION.
AND I THINK WE DO ALL APPRECIATE THE HARD WORK THAT YOU'VE PUT INTO THIS.
UM, IT'S WHENEVER WE ASK FOR SOMETHING, WE, WE DO GET IT TIMELY AND WE GET WHAT WE ASKED FOR AND THAT'S VERY HELPFUL.
SO I THINK WHAT I'LL DO AT THIS POINT, UNLESS THERE'S ANY OBJECTIONS OR ANY CONCERNS, UM, I DO HAVE, UH, A RESOLUTION THAT DREW PREPARED AND, UH, I'LL READ
[00:40:01]
THE RESOLUTION AND THEN DO A ROLL CALL VOTE IF THAT'S A PREFERRED METHOD.UM, I MEAN, DO YOU WANNA, BEFORE YOU READ A RESOLUTION ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, DO YOU WANNA ASK PEOPLE WHAT THEY THINK FIRST AND THEN YOU CAN I I, I FELT LIKE I, I THREW THE TWO OPTIONS OUT THERE AND, AND I DIDN'T GET A, A RESPONSE EITHER WAY AND HOW, HOW PEOPLE WANTED TO DO IT.
YOU WANNA DO IT THE OTHER WAY, WE CAN DO IT THE OTHER WAY.
SO, UM, WELL LET'S DO IT THE OTHER WAY THEN.
WELL, WE'LL, WE'LL START WITH YOU CAITLYN, 'CAUSE YOU BROUGHT IT UP.
UH, I THINK THAT THEY'VE ADDRESSED MANY OF THE CONCERNS, BUT I STILL AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE DRIVEWAY ON HEALTH ROAD SHINING INTO AN ADJACENT PROPERTY AND IT MINIMIZING THE ABILITY TO PRESERVE THE CHARACTER AND, AND THE AREA THERE AS WELL AS SOME OF THE, THE TRAFFIC RELATED QUESTIONS NEVER GOT ANSWERED WITH APPROPRIATE DOCUMENTATION, UM, FOR ME.
SO I GUESS I WOULD LEAD, BECAUSE I STILL HAVE OUTSTANDING QUESTIONS THAT I THINK THAT I HAVE TO AIR TOWARDS A PAUSE DECK BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE ALL THOSE BOXES CHECKED AT THIS TIME.
I, I STILL, UH, WELL BEFORE, UM, UH, MR. CALAMARI I'LL ADDRESS BECAUSE YOU WROTE IN A LETTER ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE, UH, LISTENING TO THE RESIDENTS AND PARTICULARLY CERTAIN ONES THAT HIGHLIGHTED CERTAIN THINGS ABOUT HOW THE ZONING, AND YOU'RE CORRECT AND EVERYONE'S CORRECT, THE ZONING IS NOT OUR CONCERN, BUT, UH, LONG BEFORE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND EVERYTHING, WE AS A P PARTY BOARD HAVE TALKED ABOUT THESE ISSUES AND I'VE STUCK AND MOST OF 'EM STUCK TO THE SAME ISSUES.
I HAVE A PROBLEM AND ALL THE STUDIES ARE IN OTHER PROFESSIONALS, AND I'M NOT GONNA DISRESPECT OR DISPARAGE THE PROFESSIONALISM, BUT NOBODY CAN GUARANTEE THE SAFETY ISSUES HERE THAT I HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT.
I THINK THIS PEDESTRIAN AND EVEN THE TRAFFIC ISSUES WHERE THIS IS LOCATED STILL, STILL IS A CONCERN TO ME.
AND I THINK THAT REALLY WOULD HAVE A BIG IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT AT, AT THIS TIME.
I, THERE'S NO STUDY THAT YOU CAN GUARANTEE AND I CAN'T GUARANTEE THAT, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING COULD OR WOULD NOT HAPPEN.
BUT I BELIEVE PEDESTRIANS ARE GONNA GO TO THIS PLACE.
YOU'RE, I, THERE'S A LIST OF THINGS THAT COULD GO THERE AND I HAPPEN TO LOOK 'EM UP AND YOU CAN PUT A, A BOAT OR MARINE AND SERVICE, YOU CAN PUT A WAREHOUSE, YOU CAN PUT A WHOLESALE SALES DISTRIBUTOR.
THERE'S OTHER, BUT AS YOU SAY IN YOUR LETTERS, WE CAN'T TELL THE PROPERTY OWNER WHAT TO DO WITH THEIR BUSINESS.
I BELIEVE IT'S ONE OF MY JOBS HERE ON THE PLANNING BOARD BECAUSE THE SAFETY OF THE COMMUNITY C AND THIS, THIS, THIS, THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE IN SITE WITH THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT IMPACTS I THINK A SAFETY ISSUE.
AND, UH, I, I, I SAID THAT BEFORE THE PUBLIC HEARINGS AND I SAID IT AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARINGS.
OKAY, SO THE, THE PERSON NEXT TO BOB ON MY SCREEN IS DENNIS.
TO, TO BE HONEST, I I HAVE TO GO, UH, AND VOTE FOR A NEGATIVE DECK.
I DON'T THINK THERE'S ENOUGH TO CONVINCE ME THAT WE NEED TO, TO DO ANYTHING FURTHER TO CHARACTER THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I DON'T KNOW, UH, I THINK THEY DID A NICE JOB WITH THE BUILDING.
IF IT WAS THAT SQUARE BOX, I WOULD DEFINITELY SAY, UH, THE OPPOSITE.
BUT I THINK THEY'VE COME EVERYWHERE AS FAR AS PEDESTRIAN SAFETY.
SO I CAN HOLD UP A PROJECT BASED ON SOMETHING THAT, THAT I DON'T KNOW IT'S GONNA HAPPEN.
UH, AND AS LONG AS THEY DON'T PUT A BIKE RACK THERE, I I DON'T THINK THEY'RE GONNA, UH, DO ANYTHING OTHER THAN, YOU KNOW, SELL THE PRODUCT.
AND I GO WITH A NEGATIVE DECLARATION, RIGHT, MEGAN? YEAH, I'M JUST SITTING HERE REVIEWING MY NOTES FROM THE PAST SEVERAL MEETINGS.
I, I STILL, I HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE TRAFFIC.
THE TRAFFIC HAS ALWAYS BEEN MY NUMBER ONE CONCERN.
I HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE TRAFFIC AND I'M WITH KAITLYN ON THE LOCATION OF THE DRIVEWAY.
I'M GIVING, UM, A NEGATIVE DECK.
SO AT THIS POINT I'M REALLY, WHEN THEIR EXPERT COULDN'T COME OUT AND TELL ME THAT IT WAS A SAFE, A SAFE SITUATION LAST WEEK, IT MAKES IT HARD.
I WENT BACK AND REVIEWED THE TAPES.
UM, SO YEAH, I'M AT THE POINT WHERE IT'S MOST LIKELY A POSITIVE DEATH.
UH, DOUG? YES? CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES.
OKAY, WELL, UH, A COUPLE POINTS I WANNA MAKE, UH, I'LL GO RIGHT TO THE FIRST ONE FIRST.
[00:45:01]
I AGREE WITH DENNIS THAT I CAN'T SEE ANYTHING BLARING THAT, THAT I COULD GIVE IT A POSITIVE DECK.NOW THAT BEING SAID, UH, A LOT OF THE STUFF THAT WAS BROUGHT UP, I, I AGREE WITH, YEAH, IT'S BAD THERE.
UH, SOMEBODY'S WALKING ACROSS THAT'S BAD.
BUT YOU CAN SAY THAT I QUESTION, YOU CAN SAY THAT WITH ALMOST ANY PROJECT ALONG ROUTE 20, JUST BECAUSE ROUTE 20 IS WHAT IT IS AND YOU CAN'T CHANGE THAT.
YOU CAN'T LEGISLATE INTELLIGENCE WHEN PEOPLE TRY CROSSING IT.
UH, I THINK, UH, THE, THE, UH, UH, RESIDENTS, I AGREE ABOUT THE LIGHTS GOING IN YOUR HOUSE ALL THE TIME.
AND I AGREE THAT, UH, TRYING TO GET OUT ON THE HEALTH ROAD AND GO THAT IT, IT IT IS A SON OF A GUN.
BUT I'M LOOKING AT IN GENERAL, YOU COULD SAY, YOU COULD SAY THIS FOR EVERYTHING THAT WOULD GO TO THIS LOT.
SO THAT BEING SAID, THAT THE ZONING WOULD HAVE TO REALLY BE CHANGED BECAUSE THAT WOULD STOP ALL THIS OTHER ARGUING ABOUT THE TRAFFIC AND WHATEVER.
NOW I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY CHANGED IT TO, UH, RESIDENTIAL OR WHATEVER TO MAKE IT JUST SO NOT NO, NO, UH, STORE COULD GO IN THERE, BUT YOU SEE WHAT I MEAN? WOULD YOU COULD USE THE SAME ARGUMENTS FOR ANYTHING ALONG ROUTE 20, ANYTHING ALONG THERE BECAUSE YOU GOT THE SAME PROBLEMS WITH PEOPLE TRYING TO CROSS THE STREET.
YOU GOT THE SAME PROBLEM WITH, UH, BICYCLES.
YOU GOT SAME PROBLEM WITH PEDESTRIANS.
SO I THINK THE MAJOR PROBLEM ON THAT IS, IS THE ZONING.
BUT SINCE IT'S ZONE THAT WAY, I DON'T SEE HOW YOU CAN SAY NO TO 'EM.
I MEAN, IF YOU WANNA SAY NO, REALLY THE THING HAS TO DO IS THE BOARD TOWN BOARD'S GOTTA CHANGE THAT ZONING SO IT DOESN'T HAMSTRING US TO SAY, YOU KNOW, TO SAY NO THERE.
DID I, DID I TALK TOO MUCH?
UM, AL WELL, AS FAR AS THE DEVELOPER, I THINK HE, BEN OVER BACKWARDS TRYING TO MEET ALL OUR CONCERNS.
IF THIS PROJECT WAS, UH, LOCATED AT A DIFFERENT LOCATION, I THINK IT WOULD, IT APPROVED DOWN AND IT WOULD'VE BY APPROVAL, BUT I CAN'T GET BY THE SAFETY FACTOR OF THE TRAFFIC AND THE PEDESTRIANS, SO I'LL HAVE TO GIVE IT A MM-HMM
UM, SO I, I DO HAVE A RESOLUTION FOR THAT.
UM, AND I'LL READ THAT IN A SECOND, BUT BEFORE, UM, I DO THAT, I JUST DID WANNA PUT SOME THINGS ON THE RECORD.
UM, THE BIGGEST ISSUE FOR ME ALSO IS, IS THE PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC.
I THINK THE GENERAL STORE, NO MATTER WHAT GENERAL STORE WOULD ATTRACT PEDESTRIANS IN A WAY DIFFERENT THAN, UH, THE GOLF CART OR A BUTCHER SHOP OR ON THAT SIDE.
UH, I DID FIND A LOT OF THE INFORMATION AT THE LAST MEETING ABOUT THE GAP TIMES AND HOW LONG IT TAKES TO CROSS.
UH, VERY COMPELLING AND INTERESTING.
UH, I HAVE A HARD TIME RECONCILING THAT WITH THE FACT THAT EARLY ON IN THIS PROCESS, WE WANTED SOME TYPE OF CROSSWALK AND THE DOT DIDN'T WANNA ENCOURAGE PEDESTRIANS.
SO WE'VE GOT THE DOT SAYING THEY DON'T WANNA ENCOURAGE PEDESTRIANS, BUT WE DID GET FROM THE APPLICANT, UH, INFORMATION SAYING THAT IT COULD BE SAFE FOR PEDESTRIANS.
AND I, I DO HAVE A HARD TIME RECONCILING THE TWO.
SO IN THAT SITUATION, I, I KINDA LOOK AT WHAT WE'VE DONE IN THE PAST, AND WE'VE HAD A LOT OF PROJECTS ON ROUTE FIVE WHERE THE PEOPLE WALKING TO THE ICE CREAM SHOP OR THE COFFEE SHOP OR THE RESTAURANT WOULD WALK ACROSS A BUSY STREET.
AND IN THOSE PROJECTS WE ALWAYS LOOKED AT HOW CLOSE THE NEAREST CROSSWALK WAS WHEN WE MADE OUR DETERMINATION.
UM, ANOTHER ISSUE WITH THIS ONE THAT WE, WE BROUGHT UP IS THE LIGHTS GOING ON THE OTHER HOUSES ACROSS HAL.
AND, AND WE'VE HAD A PROJECT LIKE THAT IN THE PAST ON BIGTREE WHEN THEY WANTED TO PUT IN THE NEW FIRE DEPARTMENT AND THEY PUT A BERM, AND FORTUNATELY THEY HAD MORE SPACE THERE, THEY WERE ABLE TO LINE UP THE DRIVEWAY, NOT WITH SOMEONE'S HOUSE.
UM, BUT THAT'S, THAT'S A DIFFICULT THING TO DO IS, IS, UH, PUT A DRIVEWAY FOR A GENERAL STORE FACING SOMEBODY'S HOUSE.
I KNOW THE ZONING WOULD ALLOW FOR THAT, BUT I, I THINK, YOU KNOW, SIMILAR TO WHAT AL SAID, I THINK IF THIS WAS
[00:50:01]
ON THE OTHER SIDE OF SOUTHWESTERN, IT WOULD BE A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT SITUATION, UM, WHERE YOU WOULDN'T HAVE THE DRIVEWAY GOING TOWARDS ANYONE'S HOUSE AND YOU WOULDN'T HAVE PEOPLE TRYING TO CROSS SOUTHWESTERN WHERE THERE'S NO CROSSWALK.SO WHAT I WILL DO IS THROUGH DID PREPARE A RESOLUTION FOR A POSITIVE DECK.
SO I WILL READ THAT RESOLUTION AND THEN WE CAN PUT IT TO AN OFFICIAL VOTE.
UH, WHEREAS THE TOWN OF HAMBURG RECEIVED A SITE PLAN APPLICATION FROM THE BROADWAY GROUP LLC FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A DOLLAR GENERAL STORE AND RELATED ACCESSORY USES ON SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD AND ITS INTERSECTION WITH HEALTH ROAD.
AND WHEREAS THE HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD REVIEWED THE APPLICATION AND REVISIONS TO THE APPLICATION AT MEETINGS FROM AUGUST OF 2020 TO JANUARY OF 2021.
AND WHEREAS IN ACCORDANCE WITH PART 6 1 7 OF THE IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS PERTAINING TO ARTICLE EIGHT STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW ACT, SEEKER OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION LAW, THE HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD INITIATED THE SEEKER COORDINATOR REVIEW PROCESS FOR THIS UNLISTED ACTION TO ESTABLISH THE PLANNING BOARD AS SEEKER LEAD AGENCY.
AND WHEREAS THE HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD HAS RECEIVED INPUT FROM VARIOUS INVOLVED AND INTERESTED AGENCIES AND TOWN DEPARTMENTS AND HELD A PUBLIC HEARING ON SITE PLAN APPLICATION ON DECEMBER 16TH, 2020, AND LEFT THE HEARING OPEN UNTIL JANUARY 6TH, 2021.
AND WHEREAS THE HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD HAS REVIEWED DEIF SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT, COMMENTS AND INPUT FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS, AND OTHER INVOLVED AGENCIES AND THE PUBLIC AND INFORMATION SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT ON THE PROJECT AND REVISIONS TO THE PROJECT, IT HAS REVIEWED DOWN ZONING CODE AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND WHEREAS NO OBJECTIONS WERE MADE TO THE HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD ACTING AS SECRET LEAD AGENCY AND THE PLANNING BOARD, THEREFORE HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED AS SEEKER LEAD AGENCY.
AND WHEREAS IN ACCORDANCE WITH PART 6 1 7 OF THE IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS PERTAINING TO ARTICLE EIGHT STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW ACT, SEEKER OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION LAW, THE HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD HAS COMPLETED PART TWO OF THE FEAF AND THE UTILIZED INFORMATION SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT AS EXPANDED PART THREE INFORMATION AND REVIEWED THE CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING SIGNIFICANCE IN ACCORD WITH SECTION 6 1 7 0.7 OF SEEKER AND HAS DETERMINED THE FOLLOWING.
ONE, THE PROPOSED ACTION, ALTHOUGH ZONED CORRECTLY, MAY NOT MEET THE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS LISTED IN THE SOUTHERN HAMBURG OVERLAID DISTRICT AND THE INTENT OF THE C TWO ZONING DISTRICT AND MAY NOT BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TOWN'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
TWO, THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOLLAR GENERAL AT THIS SITE WILL POTENTIALLY ADVERSELY IMPACT THE SURROUNDING AREA WITH NOISE AND LIGHT POLLUTION.
THREE, THE PROJECT IS AN AREA OF NOER NO SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE AND THE SOILS ARE POOR WITH HIGH GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS OR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AS A POTENTIAL TO HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE CHARACTER AND QUALITY OF THE EXISTING AREA AND NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND FIVE, THE PROPOSED PROJECT MAY CREATE A SAFETY ISSUE DUE TO TRAFFIC AND PEDESTRIAN SAFETY ISSUES.
AND WHEREAS THE HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW ACT, SEEKER HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED APPROVAL OF A SITE PLAN AND CONSTRUCTION OF A DOLLAR GENERAL MAY INCLUDE THE POTENTIAL FOR AT LEAST ONE SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD HEREBY ISSUES A POSITIVE DECLARATION AND AUTHORIZES THE PLANNING BOARD CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE EAF, WHICH WILL ACT AS A, THE SEEKER POSITIVE DECLARATION AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD WILL BEGIN THE EIS PROCESS ONCE THE APPLICANT SUBMITS A DRAFT SCOPING DOCUMENT, A MOTION BY MR. CLARK.
[00:55:01]
UM, I, I DO WANNA THANK THE APPLICANTS.I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANYTHING THAT DIFFERENT THAT THEY COULD HAVE DONE.
YOU WENT ABOVE AND BEYOND ANYTHING WE REQUESTED.
UH, IT'S JUST AS DREW HAS SAID, AND I THINK WE'VE BROUGHT UP MANY TIMES, IS A VERY DIFFICULT SITE.
UM, BUT I, I DO WANNA THANK YOU FOR THE EFFORT YOU PUT IN.
IT WAS, UM, AND, AND I, THE EFFORT I EXPECT YOU CONTINUE TO PUT IN TOWARDS THIS PROJECT, BUT, UH, I DID WANNA MENTION THAT IT'S, WE DON'T ALWAYS GET THAT TYPE OF COOPERATION WE HAD IN THIS CASE AND WE REALLY, REALLY APPRECIATE IT AND WE'RE VERY THANKFUL FOR IT.
WELL, UM, DEFINITELY WE'RE, UM, DISAPPOINTED WITH THE DETERMINATION OF A POSITIVE DECLARATION.
UM, WE DID DO, UM, UH, MADE MULTIPLE CONCESSIONS TO HELP ALLEVIATE THESE CONCERNS, UM, OVER THE, THE COURSE OF THE, THE VERY MANY MEETINGS AND, UM, AND JUST DISAPPOINTED THAT WE DIDN'T RESOLVE THEM TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE BOARD, UM, DESPITE THE EXPERT, UM, ADVICE AND INPUT THAT WE PROVIDED ON MANY OF THE SUBJECTS THAT WERE BROUGHT UP IN THE, THE LIST OF, OF ITEMS. SO WE'LL LOOK FORWARD TO RECEIVING THE DOCUMENTATION AND MOVING FORWARD TO THE NEXT STEP.
AND, UM, DEFINITELY LOOK FORWARD TO CONTINUING TO WORK WITH THE PLANNING BOARD, UM, TO BRING A SUCCESSFUL CONCLUSION TO THE PROJECT, IF I MAY, MR. CHAIRMAN? YES.
UM, AND MAYBE MR. RILEY MIGHT BE THE ONE TO ANSWER AND I APOLOGIZE.
DOES THE BOARD HAVE ANY SPECIFIC, UM, I DON'T WANNA SAY RULES OR REQUIREMENTS.
EVERY, EVERY DRAFT EIS IS DIFFERENT IN THAT THE BOARD TREATS THEM A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY AND I DIDN'T KNOW IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU HAVE ANY SPECIFIC GUIDANCE ON AS TO THE FORM AND SUBSTANCE AND HOW YOU WANT THAT PRESENTED.
I'M A HUGE PROPONENT, AND I KNOW IT TALKED TO THE PLANNING BOARD ON THIS, THAT EIS IS BE VERY TARGETED.
I DO NOT WANT ENCYCLOPEDIC DOCUMENTS AND WE TRIED TO HAVE THAT INCORPORATED INTO THE LAW.
I'M TIRED OF READING ABOUT THE, UH, THE HOW THE ICE AGE WAS FORMED IN WESTERN NEW YORK AND HOW THE SOILS WERE FORMED.
WE WANT TO, AND THROUGH YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT WE POSITIVE DECK AND COUPLE THESE THINGS, UM, DO A VERY SPECIFIC SCOPING DOCUMENT.
WE WILL HAVE A GET INPUT FROM THE PUBLIC AND WE WILL GIVE YOU VERY SPECIFIC OF WHAT NEEDS TO BE INCLUDED IN THAT, IN THAT DOCUMENT.
WE DO NOT WANT AN ENCYCLOPEDIC DOCUMENT.
I DON'T WANT TO HEAR ABOUT THINGS THAT, AND OF COURSE DOWNSTATE, A LOT OF THE ATTORNEYS SAY, OH, I HAVE TO COVER EVERYTHING NOW IN THE YOU DON'T WHAT IF SCOPE IS THE ITEM THAT NEEDS TO BE DISCUSSED IN THE EIS, IT JUST DOESN'T DO THE PUBLIC ANY GOOD, IT DOESN'T DO THE PLANNING BOARD ANY GOOD.
THEY GET IRRELEVANT INFORMATION THAT WE DON'T NEED.
YOU TAKE A FIRST LOOK UNDER THE NEW LAW, YOU HAVE TO SUBMIT THE DRAFT SCOPE TO START THE PROCESS, AND THEN BASICALLY THE PLANNING BOARD WILL GET PUBLIC INPUT THROUGH WHATEVER PROCESS THEY CAN.
UM, AND THEN BASICALLY FINALIZE THAT SCOPE FOR YOU TO HAVE IT VERY CLEAR.
ALSO, WITH THE ADOPTION OF THE NEW SEEKER LAW, WE, WE, WE WON'T SEE THE, THE THE, UM, UH, UH, YOU KNOW, SAYING THAT THE EI, THE EIS IS INCOMPLETE.
WE SHOULD ONLY SAY IT ONCE AND SAY CLEARLY WHAT IS MISSING.
SO YOU ADDRESS THAT AND THEN WE MOVE FORWARD ON THE DEIS.
THERE'S NO MORE REJECTION OF THE DEIS DOZENS OF TIMES.
IT'S NOT WHETHER WE AGREE OR DISAGREE.
SO I LIKE TO RUN A VERY, AND I'M SURE THE PLANNING BOARD AGREES, LET'S TALK ABOUT THE ISSUES, LET'S ADDRESS THE ISSUES, LET'S TALK ABOUT POTENTIAL MITIGATIONS AND ALTERNATIVES AND LET'S RESOLVE THOSE ISSUES IF WE CAN.
AGAIN, WHEN WE GET TO THE END OF AN EIS PROCESS, IT'S DIFFERENT.
WE HAVE TO MITIGATE TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PRACTICABLE.
IT'S NO LONGER WHETHER IT MAY IMPACT THE ENVIRONMENT WE'RE MI WE'RE MITIGATING TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PRACTICABLE.
HAVE WE SHOWN ON THE RECORD THAT WE'VE DONE THAT? SO AGAIN, I, I THINK THE PLANNING BOARD, SOME OF YOU HAVEN'T DEALT WITH AN EIS SOME OF YOU HAVE DEALT WITH ONE BEFORE.
UM, BUT LET'S DO A VERY TARGETED ONE.
THERE ARE SPECIFIC ISSUES THAT WE NEED TO ADDRESS AND CLEAR FOR THE PLANNING BOARD TO MAKE THOSE DEC MAKE THAT DECISION.
WELL THAT WAS THE ONLY ITEM WE HAD ON THE AGENDA.
UM, BEFORE WE CLOSE THE MEETING, UM, IF THERE'S BEEN A LOT IN THE NEWS ABOUT AN AMAZON PROJECT AND WHETHER OR NOT THAT WOULD BE COMING BEFORE THE PLANNING BOARD, AND THERE'S BEEN SOME, UH, UNFORTUNATE THAT THE, THE
[01:00:01]
WRONG INFORMATION WAS PUT OUT AND I DON'T KNOW THAT IT WAS, UH, CLARIFIED.SO FOR THE PURPOSE OF ANYBODY REVIEWING THIS MEETING, UH, DREW, YOU WANNA WEIGH IN ON, SO AMAZON WILL NOT BE COMING IN FRONT OF THE PLANNING BOARD, RIGHT? IT HAS TO DO WITH INCLUSIONARY ZONING, RIGHT? SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WAS IN OUR RECORD ALSO.
UM, IF YOU WANNA EXPLAIN THAT BRIEFLY SO IT CAN BE PART OF THE RECORD.
THE TOWN MANY YEARS AGO CREATED A PRE PERMITTED SITE LAW BASICALLY SAYING THAT THERE'S A METHODOLOGY, GET YOUR SITE PRE PERMIT, THAT IT WOULD NOT HAVE TO APPEAR BEFORE THE PLANNING BOARD BECAUSE IT'S GONE THROUGH.
ALL THESE RECORDS USUALLY APPLY TO INDUSTRIAL PARKS OR WHATEVER.
PART OF THE REQUIREMENT OF THAT IS YOU HAVE TO DO A GENERIC IMPACT STATEMENT.
YOU HAVE TO DO ISSUE FINDINGS.
THE TOWN WENT THROUGH A TWO YEAR PROCESS OF, OF CREATING THE LAW AND DOING AN IMPACT STATEMENT AND HAVING THE IMPACT STATEMENT DONE WITH PLANNING BOARD INPUT, ALL BOARDS INPUT THEY ISSUED ON THAT INDUSTRIAL PARK AND BASICALLY SET IT MET THE REQUIREMENTS OF PRE PERMITTING, SET UP A RULE IF YOU HAVE TO MEET ALL THESE REQUIREMENTS.
SO THE FIRST PROJECT IN THAT PARK THAT WENT THROUGH THAT WAS THE FEDEX PROJECT.
IT WAS DETERMINED AFTER THEY AGREED TO BUILD THE ROAD, WHICH WAS PART OF THE FINDINGS THAT BASICALLY, THAT THAT SITE WAS PRE PERMIT, DID NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE PLANNING BOARD.
SO RIGHT NOW THE TOWN IS GOING THROUGH DOCUMENTING IF THE PROJECT IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FINDINGS AND THE PRE PERMITTING OF THAT SITE, IF THE TOWN DETERMINES THAT AND THERE'S MANY PEOPLE INVOLVED IN THAT STEP, SIGNS OFF ON THE FORM THAT IT IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THAT.
IT WILL NOT APPEAR, APPEAR BEFORE THE PLANNING BOARD AT THIS TIME.
THE TOWN BELIEVES THE DOCUMENTATION IS THERE THAT WILL NOT, WILL NOT HAVE TO APPEAR BEFORE THE PLANNING BOARD.
BUT I I POINTED OUT THERE'S STILL SOME DOCUMENTATION NEEDED, UH, TO FINALIZE THAT DOCUMENTATION.
THE, THE TOWN ENGINEER HAS TO SIGN OFF ON IT, THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT HAS TO SIGN OFF IT, THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT.
AND WE EVEN HAVE BILL TO DO A FINAL LOOK AT IT TOO, TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S IN ACCORDANCE WITH THOSE REQUIREMENTS.
SO IT WAS MISREPORTED AND THE, AND THE SUPERVISOR APOLOGIZES THAT STATED, THAT APPEARED BEFORE THE, THE PLANNING BOARD AND CONSERVATION.
UH, THE TRAFFIC SAFETY BOARD DOES NOT.
IF IT MEETS ALL THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE PRE PERMITTED AND THE, AND THE GENERIC IMPACT STATEMENT FINDINGS, THEN IT WILL NOT BE APPEARING BEFORE THE PLANNING BOARD OR ANY BOARD.
IT WOULD BE ISSUED AS PRE PERMANENT.
UM, SO THAT'S KIND OF THE TOWN SET UP THAT LAW WHEN THROUGH A PROCESS OF SETTING THAT LAW.
UM, THERE IS SOME, A LOT OF PRE PERMANENTED SITES DOWNSTATE.
THERE'S ONLY A HANDFUL HERE IN UPSTATE NEW YORK AND THE TOWN HAS ONE AND SPENT A LOT OF MONEY, HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS ALONG WITH DEVELOPERS TO DEVELOP THAT, THAT PRE TED SITE.
SO, UM, THAT'S, THAT'S KIND OF, I MEAN, GOING FORWARD THO THOSE TYPES OF, UH, PRE PERMANENT OR INCENTIVE ZONINGS RIGHT.
ARE ON THE TABLE FOR MCKINLEY MALL AND THE AREA BY CAMP ROAD.
WELL ACTUALLY BILL, THAT'S, THAT'S A GOOD POINT.
THE TOWN IS THINKING TOWN DOES NOT HAPPEN.
THE DOWNTOWN DOES NOT HAVE AN INCENTIVE ZONING LAW.
THEY'RE THINKING OF CREATING AN INCENTIVE ZONING LAW AND GO THROUGH THE PROCESS OF ALLOWING, SO THE TOWN IS THINKING OF DOING THAT AS A TOOL TO HELP WITH THE REDEVELOPMENT OF MCKINLEY MALL IN THE AREA, IN THAT AREA.
THIS WAS A TOOL SPECIFICALLY CREATED THE PRE PERMANENTED TOOL TO DEAL WITH AN INDUSTRIAL PARK THAT HAD SAT VACANT FOR 35 YEARS, APPROVED AS AN INDUSTRIAL PARK.
THE TOWN WENT THROUGH AN ARDUOUS PROCESS AND A LAW TO CREATE THAT SO THAT THAT PROJECT, THAT FUTURE PROJECTS CAN GO IN.
I BELIEVE BILL, IF THIS AMAZON PROJECT GOES FORWARD, I THINK MOST OF THE SITE WILL BE DEVELOPED.
THERE'LL BE NO MORE PRE PERMANENT SITES LEFT IN THE TOWN BECAUSE BETWEEN FEDEX AND THEN SARAH, THERE'S BEEN A COUPLE OTHER PROJECTS IN THERE.
THERE WAS A, UM, I FORGET THERE WERE ONE OTHER, A COUPLE OTHER SMALL PROJECTS APPROVED ON THE FEDEX SIDE.
AND THEN I BELIEVE THE AMAZON PROJECT WILL, WILL TAKE ALMOST MOST OF WHAT'S LEFT.
RIGHT, SARAH? THERE ARE A COUPLE MORE SITES THAT ARE BEING DISCUSSED RIGHT NOW.
BUT THEY'RE NOT AS BIG AS THE SITE.
SO ONCE THAT PARK IS FILLED, THEN THERE'S NO MORE PRE PERMANENT SITES IN THE TOWN.
THE TOWN, SOMEBODY WOULD HAVE TO COME IN AND PROPOSE AND GO THROUGH AN ARDUOUS PROCESS TO GET THAT, INCLUDING THE PLANNING BOARD, UH, TO GET THAT SITE SET UP AS A PRE PERMANENTED SITE.
SO, UM, I DON'T THINK ANY OF YOU WERE ON THE PLANNING BOARD WHEN THE TOWN ESTABLISHED THAT PRET SITE AND ESTABLISHED THAT THAT HAD TO BE, I CAN'T REMEMBER SARAH, WAS THAT 7, 8, 9 YEARS AGO? TIME GOES BY SO FAST.
SO, AND THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE IDA IS FRIDAY AT 7:30 AM
[01:05:01]
AND IT'S JUST ON THE INCENTIVES THAT ARE GONNA BE OFFERED.I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY IF PEOPLE ARE GONNA COMMENT ABOUT OTHER THINGS, THEY'LL COMMENT, BUT REALLY THE ONLY DECISION THE IDA IS MAKING IS WHAT INCENTIVES WILL BE PROVIDED TO THE PROJECT.
SO, UH, ALL CITIZENS SHOULD COMMENT ON THAT.
THE IDA HAS DISCRETIONARY POWER ON WHETHER TO GIVE CERTAIN INCENTIVE TO CERTAIN PROJECTS.
SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY'RE ASKING.
I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THEY'RE ASKING FROM AN INCENTIVE STANDPOINT.
UM, THEY'RE VOTING ON THE ACTUAL PROJECT ON TUESDAY FROM WHAT I HEAR, RIGHT.
THE, THE INCENTIVES FOR THE PROJECT, RIGHT? THAT'S, YEAH.
AND BASICALLY IT'S, YOU KNOW, TAX BREAKS NOT A WHOLE LOT.
YOU PAID LIKE 1.2 MILLION FOR THE PROPERTY AND I THINK THEY'RE GONNA PAY THAT, UH, EITHER FIVE OR 800,000 A YEAR TILL THAT'S PAID OFF.
SO, YOU KNOW, YEAH, I CAN I, AND THAT'S UP TO THE DAI CAN'T SEE THEM GIVING HUGE TAX FIX THAT TO HAVE THOUGHT.
I, I WAS JUST BRINGING IT UP BECAUSE WE WERE MENTIONED IN THE PAPERS AS HAVING SOMETHING TO DO WITH IT.
I JUST WANTED TO PUT ON THE RECORD THAT WE, WE DON'T AND RECORD PEOPLE TO THE, TO THE ACTUAL PUBLIC HEARING.
THE IDA AND BY THE WAY, BILL, YOU BROUGHT UP THE INCENTIVE ZONING THING.
I BELIEVE THE SUPERVISOR HAS PUT A TENTATIVE DATE OUT THERE IF PEOPLE WANT TO PUT IT IN THEIR CALENDARS OF THAT JOINT MEETING BETWEEN THE PLANNING BOARD AND TOWN BOARD TO TALK ABOUT THAT.
AND I BELIEVE THAT DATE HAS BEEN SET FOR THE, I THINK IT'S THE FEBRUARY 22ND MEETING.
YEAH, HE SENT, HE SENT ME THE TENTATIVE DATE.
I'M JUST LETTING YOU GUYS KNOW THAT.
I BELIEVE THAT MAY BE THE FIRST DATE.
HE MAY CHANGE IT, BUT THAT, SO PUT IT IN YOUR TENTATIVELY IN YOUR CALENDARS FOR NOW.
YOU'LL GET AN EMAIL FROM THE SUPERVISOR, BUT I JUST WANNA LET YOU KNOW THAT THERE'S TENTATIVE DATES SET UP FEBRUARY 22ND, BECAUSE AS SARAH SAID, HE HASN'T TOLD ANY OF US THAT YET.
I GOT AN EMAIL LATE TODAY SAYING, DOES THIS DATE WORK FOR YOU? AND I SAID, YES IT DID.
'CAUSE HE WANTS ME TO PRESENT THE IDEA.
WE'RE GONNA PRESENT TWO THINGS AT THAT MEETING.
THE INCENTIVE ZONING LAW FOR MCKINLEY, AND THEN IDEAS FOR NEW ZONING DISTRICT FOR AROUND THE CAMP ROAD INTERCHANGE.
WHAT, WHAT WAS THAT DATE, DREW? UH, FEBRUARY 22ND.
IT, IT'LL BE A WORK SESSION MEETING OF THE TOWN BOARD.
UH, IT'S FEBRUARY 22ND AT, AT 5:00 PM I BELIEVE IS ATTENDED.
PUT IT IN YOUR CALENDARS AS AN EMAIL FROM THE SUPERVISOR.
HEY, BILL, A RELATED QUESTION.
UM, DO YOU KNOW IF THERE WILL BE ANY OR WHEN THE NEXT UPDATE OR ROUND OF PROCESS OR FOR INPUT OR ENGAGEMENT ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PROCESSES OR IF THERE'LL BE PRELIMINARY INFORMATION COMING OUT? I KNOW THAT BILL'S ON THE COMMITTEE.
SO WE HAVE A MEETING TOMORROW AT FIVE 30 AND WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT PUBLIC INPUT.
KAITLYN, WE HAVE A PUBLIC CONSULTANT ABOUT HOW WE CAN DO THIS IN THE NEXT COUPLE MONTHS DURING THE PANDEMIC, AND THEN HOW WE CAN GET GARNER PUBLIC INPUT.
BUT WE WILL BE GOING OUT THERE.
WE HAVE PRESS RELEASES, WE HAVE ALL THOSE THINGS.
WE'RE GONNA TALK TO, UH, THE COMMITTEE ABOUT GETTING ALL THAT WORD OUT.
I THINK BETH'S EVEN DONE A VIDEO TO, TO PUT OUT THERE AND WHATEVER.
AND WE HAVE OTHER, A BUNCH OF GREAT TOOLS THAT GET OUT TO THE PUBLIC DURING THIS PANDEMIC.
I LIKE DOING PUBLIC MEETINGS, BUT I DON'T THINK WE'RE GONNA BE ABLE TO DO A PUBLIC MEETING OVER, BUT I WANT EARLY INPUT.
SO WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT THAT AT THE MEETING TOMORROW.
UH, HOW WE CAN GET BEST GET OUT, IF YOU GUYS HAVE IDEAS WE'RE TRYING TO GET, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT SENDING LETTERS TO SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS, UH, YOU KNOW, DOING THINGS IN THE PAPER PRESS RELEASES, WHATEVER.
IF YOU GUYS HAVE ANY IDEAS, WE NEED TO GET THE WORD OUT, GET THE PUBLIC INVOLVED, RIGHT, BILL? YES.
UM, YEAH, MAYBE WE WANNA SEND THE PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS, UH, THAT OUTLINE THAT THEY DID EARLIER ABOUT THE PUBLIC OUTREACH AND HOW THE PROCESS WOULD GO.
UH, BECAUSE I, I WAS, I WAS ACTUALLY IMPRESSED WITH THE WAY WE HOPE THAT WILL GO.
SO WE
SO I'LL GET YOU THE PUBLIC OUTREACH PLAN.
IF YOU GUYS, I'LL SEND A COPY TO YOU AND YOU CAN TAKE A LOOK AT IT.
IT'D BE GREAT TO TO HEAR FROM YOU GUYS, BUT THEY PUT A KIND OF GREAT PLAN TOGETHER TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PUBLIC'S INVOLVED.
AND, AND IN ADDITION TO PUBLIC MEETINGS, THERE'S ALSO, UH, SURVEYS.
AND, UH, THE NEXT SURVEY WILL PROBABLY GO ONLINE VERY SHORTLY AFTER TOMORROW.
SO, UM, SO THAT'S ANOTHER GOOD WAY.
LAST TIME WE DID THAT, WE GOT A LOT OF GOOD RESPONSES FROM THE PUBLIC AS PART OF THE, UH, THE COMMERCIAL VACANCY GROUP DID A SURVEY, RIGHT? AND ANYBODY LISTEN ON FACEBOOK, GREAT OPPORTUNITY HERE'S TO GET OUT AND, AND SAY WHAT YOU THINK THE FUTURE OF THE HAMBURGER IS AND WHERE WE NEED TO CHANGE THINGS.
[01:10:01]
WE'VE ALREADY TARGETED THIS AREA OF LAKEVIEW AGAIN AS AN AREA THAT WE REALLY GOTTA PUT SOME STRONG THOUGHT INTO BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S SOMETHING THAT, THAT'S GOTTA BE THOUGHT ABOUT.LAKEVIEW IS CHANGING AND, AND HOW WE WANNA SEE IT HAPPEN IN THE FUTURE.
THERE'S OTHER, THERE'S PROBABLY A, A DOZEN AREAS WITHIN THE TOWN THAT ARE GONNA HAVE VERY FO FOCAL POINTS.
I MEAN, MCKINLEY MALLS AND OTHER ONE, THAT WHOLE AREA AND WHAT'S GOING ON THERE.
SO, UM, AND THAT SURVEY GOES ON, IT'S HAMBURG SURVEYS.COM, RIGHT? YEAH.
THERE'LL BE A PAGE FOR PEOPLE TO DOWNLOAD INFORMATION.
JEN'S DONE A GREAT JOB, JEN, SETTING UP, YOU KNOW, THOSE THINGS.
WE'RE GONNA HAVE A GREAT, UH, PAGE THAT YOU CAN GET TO RIGHT ABOUT THE PROJECT.
WE'RE ABOUT A MONTH BEHIND BECAUSE OF THE PANDEMIC TRYING TO COME UP WITH DIFFERENT METHODOLOGIES TO, TO GET, WE DON'T WANT TO GET TOO FAR IN THE PLAN WITHOUT HEARING FROM THE PUBLIC, SO WE WANNA MAKE SURE WE GET OUT AND HEAR FROM THE PUBLIC.
ANYTHING ELSE WITH OTHER BUSINESS? UH, WE HAVE MINUTES FROM THE MEETING ON JANUARY 6TH AND ALSO DECEMBER 30TH.
WELL, UH, I'M GONNA START WITH THE DECEMBER OR THE JANUARY ONES, 'CAUSE I JUST LOOKED AT THOSE, BUT I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM THE MEETING ON JANUARY 6TH, SECOND 21.
A, UH, MOTION BY MS. MCCORMICK, SECOND BY MR. MAHONEY TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF JANUARY 6TH.
I GUESS I'LL DO THE OTHER ONE.
I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM THE DECEMBER 30TH MEETING.
WE'RE NOT, YOU GUYS ARE GONNA HAVE A PRETTY, PRETTY HEAVY MEETING NEXT TIME.
WE HAVE FOUR NEW PROJECTS AND FOUR OLD PROJECTS, AND WE'VE GOT ADDITIONAL NEW PROJECTS COMING THAT I'VE PUSHED OFF TO THE NEXT MEETING BECAUSE THERE'S SO MANY OF THEM, JUST SO YOU KNOW.
UH, CAN I ASK A QUESTION? DO WE POTENTIALLY, IF WE HAVE ENOUGH OF A HEAVY WORK SESSION AGENDA, WANNA START THE WORK SESSION LIKE 15 MINUTES EARLIER OR SOMETHING TO PREVENT US STILL BEING ON THE PHONE AT 10:00 PM 15 MINUTES OR HALF AN HOUR EARLIER? I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S AN OPTION.
WE'D HAVE TO DECIDE TODAY BECAUSE SARAH WOULD JUST HAVE TO NOTICE THE TIME IN THE PAPER.
SO IF, IF THAT'S SOMETHING WE'RE ALL WILLING TO DO, UM, I, I THINK I'D ONLY DO THAT IF, IF EVERY, IF EVERYBODY'S WILLING TO DO IT, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES IT'S HARD TO GET DINNER IN BEFORE THE MEETING AT SIX 30.
SO, UM, AL YOU GET DINNER IS SIX 15 GOOD.
YEAH, I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T QUITE HEAR WHAT YOU SAID.
I DIDN'T HEAR WHAT DOUG SAID, BUT, BUT BOB THOUGHT IT WAS FUNNY.
WHAT DO YOU MEAN YOU GET, YOU GET DINNER BEFORE A MEETING? I TRY TO, YEAH.
DOUG, WHAT'S THIS? MIKE? DO, DO YOU KNOW HOW HANGRY I WOULD BE THROUGH THESE MEETINGS IF I DIDN'T NEED SOMETHING BEFOREHAND? OH MAN.
SO I DID SIT IN A, UH, TOWN PLANNING BOARD MEETING ONCE WHERE THEY HAD SO MANY ITEMS IN THE WORK SESSION AND THEY STARTED IT.
THEY WENT 15 MINUTES BACK FOR EVERY ITEM AND THEY WAS, WHEN THEY HIT A CERTAIN TIME, THEY, THEY ORDERED PIZZA.
IT DOESN'T WORK SO WELL, UH, WHEN WE'RE REMOTE.
UM, DOUG, DOES SIX 15 WORK FOR YOU? YEAH, IT WORKS.
DENNIS, I GOTTA CHECK WITH MY WIFE.
RIGHT, MEGAN? YEAH, THAT WORKS FOR ME.
UH, MOST IMPORTANTLY, THE MOST IMPORTANT PERSON.
THE MOST IMPORTANT PERSON BILL IS JEN, MAKE SURE THAT'S WHAT I SAID, JEN AND JEN, IT, I AVAILABLE YOU'RE AVAIL.
SO, SO THEN YEAH, WE'LL START NEXT ONE AT SIX 15.
SO IF WE JUST PUT THE NOTICE AT SIX 15 INSTEAD OF SIX 30 IN THE PAPER NEXT TIME, SARAH, THAT'LL BE, GIVE US A, A FEW MORE MINUTES.
THERE'S STILL REMOTE NEXT TIME, RIGHT? DOUG? OR, UM, SORRY, BILL.
AS LONG AS WE'RE IN ORANGE, WE'RE GONNA BE REMOTE AND I DON'T SEE US NOT BEING AN ORANGE.
[01:15:01]
FRIDAY WHEN WE HAVE TO SEND IT OUT.UM, I MEAN, IF FOR SOME REASON WE DO SWITCH TO YELLOW BEFORE IT'S SENT OUT ON FRIDAY, THEN I, I GUESS IT'D PROBABLY BE A, A HYBRID TYPE SITUATION.
BUT I, I THINK WE'LL STILL BE IN ORANGE.
SO, AND, AND BASED ON THAT EMAIL WE GOT FROM THE SUPERVISOR ABOUT SCHEDULING THE JOINT MEETING WHERE IF IT'S ORANGE, IT'LL BE REMOTE, AND IF IT'S YELLOW IT WON'T THEN I, I, I THINK THAT'S THE WAY WE'LL GO.
OR HOPEFULLY THE, THE, THE REST OF THE PANDEMIC, WHICH HOPEFULLY WON'T BE THAT LONG.
MAKE A MOTION TO ADJOURN THE MEETING.
WELL, UM, IT'S GONNA BE A LONG MEETING.