[00:00:01]
SO WELL, AND WE CAN, HEY SARAH, IS SOMEONE SHOWING UP FOR THE FIRST AGENDA? DO YOU KNOW? NO DUNNO.YOU OKAY? JUST FOR THIS? JUST FOR THIS IS A BIG DEAL.
HOW ARE YOU? YOU GUYS ARE A BIG DEAL.
HOW ARE YOU? I'M DOING WELL, THANK YOU.
WELL, WE THINK WE ARE AT LEAST IT WAS GOOD, SURPRISINGLY SMOOTH TO BE OUT OF PRACTICE FOR TRAVELING.
I PICTURED TARA, I PICTURED YOU WITH SAME UP SHORTER.
I DON'T KNOW WHY WE ONLY SAW YOU SITTING DOWN RATHER TALL.
ALL RIGHT, LET'S, IT'S SIX 30, SO LET'S GET STARTED.
UM, OUR WORK SESSION ITEM TODAY IS KEPLINGER FREEMAN ASSOCIATES REQUESTING A REZONING OF A PORTION OF 3 4 9 7 MCKINLEY PARKWAY FROM R TWO TO C ONE IN ORDER TO CONSTRUCT A NEW WELLNESS CENTER.
SO THIS IS THE CORNER OF MCKINLEY AND MILES STRIP.
IT'S WHERE THE PIZZA HUT USED TO BE.
AND APPARENTLY PART OF THAT LOT IS ZONED RESIDENTIAL.
I DON'T KNOW IF THEY THINK THAT THE MEETING'S AT SEVEN.
SO, SO WHERE THE BUILDING IS, IS IN THE RESIDENTIAL ZONE AND WHERE, WHERE MOST OF THE PARKING LOT IS, IS IN THE RESIDENTIAL ZONE, CORRECT? YEAH, IT IS IN HERE.
IT'S JUST, I, I DON'T KNOW HOW IT GOT THAT WAY, BUT ONLY THE LITTLE PARKING AREAS IN THE COMMERCIAL.
AND THE REST OF THE BUILDING AND STUFF IS IN THE, IN THE RESIDE RESIDENTIAL, THE EXISTING, ARE THEY EXPANDING THE BUILDING OR THE PARKING LOT AT ALL? WE CAN'T HEAR YOU ON THE PHONE.
WHEN YOU'RE SPEAKING, YOU'RE GONNA NEED TO COME STAND YOUR MICROPHONE, BUT DON'T TAKE YOUR MASK OFF.
THERE'S DEMOLISHING THE BUILDING, RIGHT? THERE'S, THIS IS A REZONING REQUEST.
WE SAW IT A COUPLE MONTHS AGO OR A FEW MONTHS AGO.
UM, THEY NOW HAVE COME BACK, UH, WITH THEIR FORMAL REQUEST.
NO, WE HAVEN'T SEEN THIS BEFORE.
YEAH, BUT THEY, THEY ASKED TO BE TABLE.
IT WASN'T, IT WASN'T ON AGENDA.
IT WASN'T ON AGENDA, BUT IT GOT PULLED.
THEY'RE NOW BACK WITH THEIR APPLICATION.
WE'RE TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE TOWN BOARD.
UH, AS SARAH MENTIONED, THEY'RE TEARING THE BUILDING DOWN, BUILDING A NEW BUILDING THERE.
WE'RE LOOKING AT FIRST THE ACTION OF REZONING THE PROPERTY.
IN MY MEMO, I WAS QUITE, I MEAN, I, I HAVE NO IDEA WHY THIS PROPERTY IS ZONED THE WAY IT IS.
I MEAN, IT'S JUST NOT CORRECT.
UM, I THINK THERE'S A PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD RECOMMENDATION ON THE REZONING.
IT'S JUST TYPICALLY WITH A REZONING LIKE THIS, WE PROBABLY WANT TO ATTACH SOME CONDITIONS TO PROTECT THE RESIDENTIAL AREA.
THEY, THEY'VE GIVEN YOU A PLAN TO SEE WHAT THEY'RE DOING.
SO AGAIN, I THINK SOME OF THE CONDITIONS WOULD BE BASED ON MAINTAINING THE PROPER BUFFER AND LANDSCAPING TO ADJOINING RESIDENTIAL AREAS.
UM, THAT'S KIND OF THE BACKGROUND OF THE PROJECT FROM A STANDPOINT OF THE CODE REVIEW COMMITTEE.
WHEN WE REVIEWED IT, WE THOUGHT IT WAS A NO BRAINER THAT THE CO SHOULD BE COMMERCIAL.
AND MATTER OF FACT, WE HAD RECOMMENDED, THEY ORIGINALLY SAID C TWO, WE WANT TO BE C ONE BECAUSE THE PROPERTIES, SOME OF THE PROPERTIES ON THE CORNER ARE, ARE C ONE GOOD? CAN? NO, I JUST, CAN YOU GUYS MUTE YOURSELVES? 'CAUSE SOMEONE IS SHUFFLING PAPERS OR SOME THANK YOU.
YEAH, IT'S L'S L THERE'S SOME NOISE COMING AROUND YOURS.
YEAH, I MEAN, I, I THINK WE A CONDITION NOT JUST MAINTAIN THE BUFFERS AND LANDSCAPING, BUT ENHANCE THE BUFFERS AND LANDSCAPING WOULD BE A CONDITION OF THE REZONING.
WHICH IT LOOKS LIKE THEY PLAN, RIGHT? DO THAT.
EVERYBODY ON, SHOULD WE TAKE ATTENDANCE? WHO'S ON? EVERYBODY'S ON.
WHO'S THE PERSON OF THE RIGHT? IS THAT AN APPLICANT OR REPUBLICAN? A IS AL NO, ON THE RIGHT PICTURE.
[00:05:01]
ABOVE THE RED.OH, WHO IS THAT? IS SOMEONE HERE REPRESENTING THE A JOSE? MUCH BETTER.
CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? YEAH, WE CAN HEAR YOU.
SO THERE WAS JUST A LOT OF BACKGROUND NOISE, RIGHT? WE JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THERE'S SOMEONE FROM THE, FROM THE APPLICANT ON THE LINE.
MEGAN, IS IT? SO IT'S JUST DENNIS, JENNIFER, MEGAN AND MYSELF.
IT'S THE NAME AND EVERYTHING UP THERE, RIGHT? SORRY.
UM, DOES THE PLANNING BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? ANY ISSUES YOU WANT US TO RESEARCH? UH, WE CAN RELAY QUESTIONS TO THE APPLICANT.
MAYBE THEY THOUGHT THE MEETING WAS AT SEVEN OR SOMETHING, BUT YEAH, I, I GOT A FEW COMMENTS SURE.
NOW YOU COULD SEE WE'RE DOING A LOT OF REZONING AND I WENT BY HER THE OTHER DAY.
THIS ONE IS PARTICULARLY, UH, A PROBLEM FOR ME BECAUSE RIGHT NEXT TO WHERE THEY'RE GONNA DOWN IS IN SMALL, AND I DON'T WANT C WITHOUT RESTRICTIONS BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, IT'S HAPPEN.
WE GONNA LET, THEY CAN DO WHAT THEY WANNA DO.
THEY'LL SELL THEIR BUILDING THE NEXT, THEY'RE GONNA BRING SOMETHING ELSE IN THERE, UH, WITH PLANNING AND THEY'LL GO ALONG WITH IT.
RIGHT? THEY, THEY, DENNIS, THEY CHANGE IT, THEY CHANGE IT TO C ONE FOR A REASON AND THEY WANT OUR TWO C ONE.
SO WHOEVER DID THAT BACK WENT.
BUT DENNIS, I THINK THEY NEED THE RIGHT IDEA.
WE SHOULD GO IN THERE AND PUT THESE PEOPLE ON MCKINLEY PARK AT RISK DOWN THE ROAD.
BUT, BUT DENNIS, DENNIS, IT IS AN EXISTING, IT'S AN EXISTING RESTAURANT.
HU IT'S A RESTAURANTS, THE PIZZA HUT.
HE TALKING ABOUT, HE'S TALKING ABOUT GONNA C2 NO, C1.
BUT WE TOLD THEM WE WOULDN'T ENTERTAIN C TWO.
ONLY PART OF IT THAT, THAT'S THE CURRENT, I'M READING THIS AND IT SAYS THE CURRENT ZONING OF C ONE SLASH R TWO WAS RESTRICTED TO THE PREVIOUS AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
SO THE PART THAT'S R TWO DENNIS.
SO, SO ALL THEY WANNA DO IS THE PART THAT'S R TWO, WHICH IS ACTUALLY MOST OF THE PARKING LOT AND THE BUILDING.
THEY DON'T WANNA TAKE ANY AREA THAT WASN'T ALREADY USED BY PIZZA HUT AND REZONE IT.
IT'S JUST THE AREA THAT WAS A C ONE USE BEFORE.
THEY WANT IT REZONED TO C ONE FOR THEIR C ONE USE.
AND I DON'T KNOW HOW PIZZA HUT WAS ON HOW THEY DID PIZZA HUT ON THE RESIDENTIAL PART OF THE LOT ANYWAY.
WELL, THEY'RE SAYING THAT THE CC ONE RESTRICTIVE, I AGREE FROM THEM, UH, ON THEIR LETTER TO THE SHERIFF.
WELL THAT'S, I MEAN, WHATEVER THEIR LETTER IS, WE MAKE A RECOMMENDATION AND IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE BASED ON THEIR LETTER.
SO WHAT WE WOULD CONSIDER IS WHETHER OR NOT, WHAT WAS THAT DENNIS DREW'S SAYING, THEY DON'T WANNA GO TO C TWO.
AND I'M SEEING HERE SAYS THEY WANNA GO TO C2, THEY AMENDED IT.
SO DENNIS, EVEN IF THEY WANNA GO TO C TWO, WE CAN SAY GO POUND SALT.
WE'RE ONLY RECOMMENDING C ONE.
OKAY? WE, WE GET TO MAKE THE DECISION, UH, WE GET TO MAKE THE RECOMMENDATION REZONING, THEY'RE ASKING FOR C ONE.
BUT, BUT EVEN IF THEY WERE ASKING FOR C TWO, WE COULD SAY, NO, WE DON'T LIKE C TWO, WE RECOMMEND C ONE.
SO, SO EVEN IF WHAT DENNIS IS READING IS THE, WAS THE MOST RECENT INFORMATION, WE COULD STILL SAY NO.
UM, SO THE, THE QUESTION REALLY IS BECAUSE THE R TWO AREA
[00:10:01]
WAS, HAS BEEN BEING USED FOR DECADES AS THE PARKING LOT AND THE RESTAURANT, DO WE CARE IF WE REZONE THAT PART OF IT TO C ONE, WHICH WAS THE USE THAT IT IT IS BEEN FOR, FOR YEARS.ANYWAY, THAT'S, THAT'S REALLY THE QUESTION THAT I SEE IN FRONT OF US.
WELL, MOVING ON BLIND, BUT IT SAYS, AND THE FIRST PARAGRAPH, BUT DENNIS, I DON'T, I DON'T CARE WHAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR THE EXISTING SPLIT ZONE C1, RIGHT? I I I THEY AMENDED IT AFTER THAT.
BUT EVEN IF THEY DIDN'T, I WOULDN'T BE HERE SAYING, HEY, LET'S DO C TWO.
WHAT I WANNA KNOW, WHAT WE WANNA DO IS IF WE, IF WE'RE OKAY WITH C1, EVEN IF THEY'RE ASKING FOR C2.
I, I I'M TELLING YOU, DENNIS, I AGREE WITH YOU.
NO C2 AND I WOULDN'T SAY, I WOULDN'T THINK THIS BOARD WOULD RECOMMEND TO THE TOWN BOARD REZONING WITH C TWO A HUNDRED PERCENT AGREE.
DO WE AGREE WITH THE REZONING TO C ONE? NO.
I JUST WANNA, I JUST WANNA EXPLAIN THAT THEY DID ORIGINALLY ASK FOR C TWO, BUT AFTER VISITING WITH THE CODE REVIEW COMMITTEE, THEY REVISED THEIR REQUEST TO C ONE.
AND YOU MAY NOT, YOU MAY NOT HAVE THIS.
I I AGREE WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS.
SO I GUESS I PARTIALLY DISAGREE WITH DENNIS.
NOT APPROPRIATE, UH, IS NOT FUNCTIONAL AS IT STANDS RIGHT.
RESIDENTIAL OR NECESSARILY THE REMAIN PORTION
SO I WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF A MAKE THAT FUNCTION PROPERTY RATHER THAN A PROPERTY THAT REMAINS.
AND, AND, AND JUST LEAVE THE POINT.
WE DO NOT DO A LOT OF REZONINGS.
THE TOWN TAKES, ITS, ITS ZONING VERY SERIOUSLY.
BUT WHEN WE MET WITH THE CODE REVIEW COMMITTEE, THIS IS AN OBVIOUS ERROR.
WE DON'T KNOW HOW IT GOT THIS WAY.
THERE'S A PIZZA HUT THERE ON AN R TWO ZONE PROPERTY.
IT'S BEEN A PIZZA HUT FOR MANY, MANY YEARS.
THE PIZZA HUT WENT OUT OF BUSINESS.
SOMEONE WANTS TO BUY IT, TEAR DOWN THAT BUILDING AND PUT UP A MUCH LOWER IMPACT USE ON THE PROPERTY.
SO WE THOUGHT THIS MADE SENSE TO FIX THIS PROPERTY, PUT SOME CONDITIONS ON THAT REZONING, KEEP THOSE BUFFERS TO THE ADJOINING RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS, IMPROVE THOSE BUFFERS ON A PROPERTY THAT HAS BEEN USED FOR DECADES AS A COMMERCIAL USE.
WE DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW EVEN OPERATED, HOW IT GOT THAT WAY.
IT IS OBVIOUS AN ERROR IN THE ZONING BECAUSE THERE'S BEEN A COMMERCIAL RESTAURANT, A C TWO USE ON THAT PROPERTY FOR DECADES.
SO, AND I AGREE, DENNIS, USUALLY WE WOULD TAKE THIS, BUT IT'S, IT IS A USE.
IT'S ACTUALLY GONNA BE BETTER.
IT'S GONNA BE A LESS, LESS IMPACT USE.
AND WE'RE GONNA PUT CONDITIONS ON IT.
IT'S GONNA COME TO YOU FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL.
WE'RE GONNA HEAR FROM THE NEIGHBORS AND MAKE SURE WE ADDRESS THEIR ISSUE.
BECAUSE RIGHT NOW, SOMEONE COULD MOVE IN THAT BUILDING AND RE-OPERATE A RESTAURANT THERE.
AND I MEAN, JUST SO EVERYTHING'S CLEAR ON THE RECORD, THE MAP, THAT'S PART OF THE MEMO THAT WE, WE GOT FROM MR. RILEY THIS WEEK.
THERE'S SEVEN PARKING SPACES THAT ARE IN C ONE, THE RESTAURANT THAT USED TO BE PIZZA HUT.
AND THE OTHER, IT LOOKS LIKE 30 OR 40 SPACES ARE ALL IN THE AREA.
AND I MEAN, SO AS, AS, AS CAITLYN SAID, NOBODY'S GONNA COME IN THERE AND TEAR OUT THAT PARKING LOT TO BUILD A HOUSE.
AND WHEN THEY REBUILD, THEY'RE ACTUALLY GONNA BUILD FURTHER AWAY FROM THE HOUSES THAN THE EXISTING BUILDING IS.
AND THAT'S A CONDITION WE CAN PUT ON A REZONING.
WE CAN SAY THAT THEY HAVE TO BE, WE, WE CAN SET SETBACKS.
WE CAN SAY WE HAVE TO HAVE ENHANCED SCREENING.
WE CAN DO A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN WHAT'S ALREADY THERE.
'CAUSE IF YOU, YOU LOOK AT IT AND YEAH, THE, THE PIZZA HU IS REALLY CLOSE TO THE HOUSES.
SO IF, IF THIS MEDICAL CENTER, IS THAT AN ACCEPTABLE UNDER C1? YES.
[00:15:01]
DID THEY EVER C2, I DON'T KNOW WHY THEY EVER WANTED A C TWO.THEY, IT, IT MIGHT BE, IT MIGHT BE KIND OF WHAT YOU WERE SAYING THERE, DENNIS, WHERE THEY, THEY THINK IF THEY WANNA SELL IT TO SOMEBODY ELSE, IT'S WORTH MORE AS A C TWO.
BUT, UM, SO I ALSO THINK THAT PART OF THEIR REASONING WAS THAT THERE IS C TWO RIGHT ACROSS
MAYBE THEY THOUGHT THAT WE WOULD LIKE C TWO BETTER BECAUSE OF THAT REASON.
MAYBE THAT, THAT WOULD BE A NICE REASON, I GUESS.
BUT WHO KNOWS, THEY'RE NOT HERE.
THEY'RE, THEY'RE NOT HERE TO TELL US WHY.
BUT, BUT EITHER WAY, I I, I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH YOU DENNIS.
I I WOULDN'T WANT C TWO RIGHT NEXT TO THOSE HOUSES EITHER.
AND I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE'S ANYBODY IN THE PLANNING BOARD THAT WOULD SUPPORT SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
UM, BUT C ONE IS, IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT OF A STORY, ESPECIALLY BEING THAT PIZZA HUTS BEEN THERE FOR SO LONG.
MIGHT I SUGGEST WE'RE NOT GONNA MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TONIGHT? I MEAN THIS IS AN INTRODUCTION TO THE PROJECT TO YOU GUYS.
WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST IS I WILL SEND YOU, IF YOU DON'T HAVE ACCESS, LOOK THROUGH THE C ONE USES AND THINK IF THERE'S ANY USES IN THERE IN THE C ONE ZONE THAT YOU WANNA PROHIBIT SO THAT SOMETHING IN THE FUTURE DOESN'T HAPPEN THERE THAT WE DON'T WANNA SEE.
WE CAN'T JUST REZONE IT FOR ONE USE, BUT WE CAN RESTRICT USES IN THAT C ONE ZONE, ASK THEM TO PUT DEED RESTRICTIONS ON THE PROPERTY OF CERTAIN USES THAT WOULDN'T BE ALLOWED.
SO MY RECOMMENDATION, THE PLANNING BOARD, AND THAT'S WHAT I WOULD DO, IS LOOK THROUGH THE C ONE USES AND SEE IF THERE'S ANYTHING IN THERE THAT YOU DON'T SEE AS APPROPRIATE.
NOW THEY'RE GONNA BUILD THIS, BUT WE JUST WANNA MAKE SURE IN THE FUTURE SOMETHING DOESN'T GO IN THERE THAT'S ONEROUS.
WE WOULDN'T WANT GAS STATIONS USED CAR LOTS, ALL THOSE THINGS AND WHATEVER THOSE C2, C1 ANYWAY.
RIGHT? SO WE'RE DOING C1 LOOK THROUGH C1 AND SEE IF THERE'S ANY USES YOU THINK WOULD BE INAPPROPRIATE IN THE FUTURE THERE.
AND THAT, THAT WORKED OUT WELL FOR US WHEN THAT C TWO ZONING WITH THE CAR WASH TOO.
WE WENT THROUGH THAT AND, AND THAT HELPED US DECIDE WHAT WE ULTIMATELY RECOMMENDED.
SO I WOULD, I THINK IT COULD POTENTIALLY BE CUMBERSOME IF PEOPLE ARE LOOKING AT PROPERTIES OR TRYING TO ACQUISITIONS TO HAVE JUST LIMITED RESTRICTIONS.
MY PREFERENCE WOULD BE THAT, SEE IF WE CAN, ARE COMFORTABLE WITH FREE AND CLEAR ON A C ONE AND NOT JUST RANDOMLY IDENTIFY, WELL NOT RANDOMLY, BUT IDENTIFY SPECIFIC USES IT.
IT'S UNCLEAR HOW OBVIOUS THAT WOULD BE ON A ZONING MAP.
AND THAT'S WHERE A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE SUCK.
AND I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE TRYING TO BE CLEAR AND CONSISTENT WITH OUR DON RATHER THAN JUST KIND OF
I, I THINK LOOKING AT, IT'S NOT A BAD IDEA, BUT I I I AGREE WITH YOU WHERE, YOU KNOW, MAYBE THE ULTIMATE RECOMMENDATION ISN'T ANY RESTRICTING ANY USES, BUT BEFORE WE MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE TOWN BOARD, IT'S, IT'S NOT BAD FOR US TO REVIEW WHAT THE PERMISSIBLE USES ARE.
AND C ONE JUST TO GO GO OVER IT ON THE RECORD AND HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT IT, UM, MAY, I MEAN IT'S C ONE'S NOT C TWO.
THE THE THINGS THAT I, THAT COME TO MIND ON THE, YOU KNOW, THAT YOU WOULDN'T WANT THERE ON THE TOP OF MY HEAD WOULDN'T BE PERMISSIBLE IN C ONE ANYWAY.
SO, UM, I MEAN I I I AGREE WHEN WE, WE CAN'T REWRITE THE ZONING CODE, BUT I, I DON'T THINK IT'S GONNA HURT US TO LOOK AT IT AS AN EXERCISE BEFORE WE MAKE A RECOMMENDATION.
DO WE WANNA WALK THROUGH THAT LIST NOW? THERE'S ONLY SIX ITEMS ON IT.
WHAT ARE THEY? UH, WELL, OKAY, I, TO GET BACK, THERE'S NUMBER ONE IS PRINCIPAL USES AND STRUCTURES PERMITTED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT.
RIGHT? SO THAT'S AN EVEN MORE RESTRICTED USE.
UM, AND THEN THE FOLLOWING USE CONDUCTED ENTIRELY WITH THE NEXT CLOSED BUILDING, RETAIL SALES, DRY CLEANING, EATING, DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS AND INDOOR ONLY GARDEN CENTER, UH, HOTELS OR MOTELS, BANKS AND DRIVE THROUGH BANKS, BALL HUBS, SQUASH COURTS, HEALTH SPAS AND RELATED PHYSICAL FITNESS FACILITIES.
AND THEN BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT, WE CAN AUTHORIZE NURSERY SCHOOLS AND DAYCARE CENTERS OR OUTDOOR DISPLAY STORAGE FOR A GARDEN CENTER.
AND THOSE ARE THE ALLOWED USES OR THE PROHIBITED USES.
THESE ARE THE LOUD USES, THOSE ARE THE PERMITTED USES.
SO, UM, I MEAN, I AM COMFORTABLE WITH ANY OF THOSE USES IN THIS AREA.
SO, AND WHAT, WHAT WOULD PIZZA HUT HAVE FALLEN UNDER? GOOD EATING OR DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS.
[00:20:02]
WITHOUT, WITHOUT ALCOHOL.THAT BEING SAID, UM, EATING OR DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS ARE LIST GOOD AND C ONE.
AND IF THEY'RE SELLING ALCOHOL, YOU CAN'T DO THAT IF YOU ARE.
SO THAT'S ALREADY, UH, PROHIBITED.
SO I, I THINK, I THINK I AGREE WITH YOU THAT WE WOULDN'T REALLY NEED TO TAKE ANY OF THOSE LIST ANYTHING THAT'S PERMITTED AND SAY IT'S NOT.
IF WE WERE TO RECOMMEND THE REZONING, UM, WHAT DOES EVERYBODY ELSE THINK? OKAY.
PERMITTED IT'S A PERMITTED USE.
WELL, WHAT DREW WAS, WAS, WAS TALKING ABOUT WAS AS A CONDITION OF THE REZONING, SAY EVEN THOUGH HOTELS ARE ALLOWED IN C ONE AS A CONDITION OF THE REZONING, WE'D SAY NO HOTEL IF WE THOUGHT THAT THAT WAS APPROPRIATE.
UM, SO THAT, THAT WAS WHAT DREW WAS SUGGESTING.
BUT I KNOW YOU, I KIND OF AGREE WITH CAITLIN THAT IT MIGHT BE KIND OF MUDDY THE WATER IF WE SAY, WELL YOU CAN, RIGHT? IT'S GONNA BE ZONED IN C ONE EXCEPT YOU CAN'T DO THESE THINGS.
PEOPLE MIGHT NOT KNOW WHO MIGHT WANT TO PURCHASE THE PROPERTY DOWN THE ROAD.
RIGHT? AND THERE'S NOTHING ON THAT LIST OF PERMITTED USES THAT'S SO EGREGIOUS THAT WE FEEL LIKE TAKING THAT STEP TO, TO RISK SOMETHING LIKE THAT, IN MY OPINION ANYWAY.
I GUESS I WILL JUST MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE KEPLER FREEMAN ASSOCIATES TO APRIL 21ST.
IT'S ALREADY PARTIALLY C ONE, RIGHT? SO WHAT THEY'RE, WHEN YOU'RE SAYING THEY WANNA DO R TWO AND MAKE THAT C ONE NOT C2? YES.
OR, OR WHAT I'M SAYING TO EVEN TO MAKE IT EVEN CLEARER IS THAT'S THE RECOMMENDATION.
I THINK WE WOULD ENTERTAIN GIVING TO THE TOWN BOARD.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT MAKES IT CLEAR OR, OR MUDDIES IT WORSE.
BUT I, I THINK TO GO ALONG WITH WHAT I WAS SAYING EARLIER, EVEN IF THEY CAME IN HERE AND SAID THEY WANTED C TWO, I DON'T THINK WE'D RECOMMEND C TWO I I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH YOU WITH THAT ON THAT ONE, DENNIS.
UM, BUT EVEN IF THEY ASKED FOR C TWO, I THINK RECOMMENDING AS REZONING TO C ONE WOULD BE PERFECTLY REASONABLE ON OUR PART, GIVEN THAT IT WAS USED AS C ONE.
AND AS KAITLYN POINTED OUT, IF YOU, THERE'S NOT AN R TWO USE THAT ANYBODY'S GONNA EVER BE ABLE TO PUT THERE.
SO BILLY, YOU'RE GONNA TABLE THIS FOR TWO WEEKS.
I MADE A MOTION TO TABLE IT FOR TWO WEEKS, BUT I DIDN'T GET A SECOND.
SO WE'LL TABLE THIS ONE FOR TWO WEEKS.
WE'LL, WE'LL PUT A SAMPLE RESOLUTION TOGETHER.
SO AT LEAST YOU HAVE SOMETHING BEFORE YOU CONSTRUCT SOMETHING.
YOU'RE NOT APPROVING IT, RIGHT? YOU'RE MAKING A RECOMMENDATION.
I'LL PUT A REPORT FORMAT TOGETHER FOR THE PLANNING BOARD TO FILL IN WHAT THEY WANNA RECOMMEND.
WELL, CAN YOU, CAN YOU MUTE? YEAH, I CAN DO THAT.
UNLESS HE WANTS TO TALK THEN WE GOT A PROBLEM.
[00:25:01]
RIGHT.AL JUST SO YOU KNOW, I HAD TO MUTE YOU.
IF YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING, YOU HAVE TO UNMUTE YOURSELF.
BUT THERE WAS A LOT OF BACKGROUND NOISE COMING FROM YOUR COMPUTER SOMEHOW.
WE'VE GOT FOUR MINUTES BEFORE WE CAN START.
SO BILL, JUST TO CONFIRM, SARAH, WHEN YOU REVISED THE MEETING, NOTICE WE ADDED THE SCHULTZ TOWING ONTO THE AGENDA FOR TODAY.
RIGHT? I SAW THAT EMAIL FROM YOU, RIGHT? OKAY, SO IS THAT, UH, BILL, WHERE WERE YOU GONNA PUT THAT ON THE AGENDA? IT'S NUMBER FOUR.
DIDN'T I SEND YOU THE REVIS, JOHN? I DON'T THINK I GOT ONE.
'CAUSE THE, YEAH, THE THING I PUT DOWN FOR MY NOTES TODAY DID NOT HAVE IT.
DID YOU GET IT CALIN? UH, IT'S, UH, I DIDN'T HAVE THE AGENDA REVIEW, BUT I JUST REALIZED THAT IT WAS ALREADY NUMBER FOUR AND YOU SENT EMAIL SAYING IT WAS, THAT WAS WHAT WAS ADDED.
SO THE, THE QUESTION IS DID IT GET NOTICED WITH ADDED? YES, IT DID GET NOTICED WITH THAT IN IT? YES, IT DID.
AND LET ME, WELL, I'LL TAKE THE TWO MINUTES.
IF ANYBODY NEEDS TRAINING CREDITS, I CAN FORWARD YOU, I I, I'M DOING A GREATER FINGER LAKES PRESENTATION.
I'LL JUST FORWARD IF PEOPLE WANT TO, THEY'RE ALL ONLINE NOW, SO THEY'RE, YOU CAN DO THEM ONLINE.
ALRIGHT, BILL, I DID THE TRAINING LAST FRIDAY THAT, UM, GENESEE COUNTY PUT ON UHHUH, UM, THAT INCLUDED SOME REALLY, UH, USEFUL INFORMATION RELATED TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING PROCESS AND THOUGHTS ON, ON HELPING
I KNOW THERE'S, I DON'T KNOW IF SARAH SHARED ALL THOSE, BUT THERE'S THREE MORE IN THAT SERIES THIS FRIDAY AND THEN THE NEXT FEW FRIDAYS IF ANYONE'S INTERESTED.
YEAH, I, I FORWARDED THAT TO THE MEMBERS.
WHAT TIME DO THEY DO THOSE? UH, THEY'RE, THEY'RE 10 30, 11 30 IN THE MORNING.
SO IT MAY NOT FIT WITH YOUR SCHEDULE EASILY, BUT THEY DID CIRCULATE SOME OF THE INFORMATION AFTERWARDS.
THEY'VE ALL BEEN DOING LOT OF TRAINING.
EVERYBODY HAS I GONNA TELL YOU THAT, BUT I KNOW THAT SHE'S,
[00:30:32]
I KEEP, AND THEN AGAIN.UH, WELCOME TO THE APRIL 7TH MEETING OF THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD.
EVERYONE PLEASE RISE FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO THE REPUBLIC FOR
SO A CHANGE TO THE AGENDA, AT LEAST THE ORIGINAL AGENDA WE RECEIVED.
I THINK THE PUBLISHED AGENDA DOESN'T CHANGE, IS NUMBER FOUR IS, UM, I, THE NUMBER FOUR ITEM IS GONNA BE SHILTS TOWING, WHICH MOVES BOSTON STATE HOLDINGS TO NUMBER FIVE AND EVERYTHING AFTER THAT.
UM, SO IF ANYBODY HAD THE OLD AGENDA, SCHUTT TOWING IS ON, IS GONNA BE DISCUSSED IN THIS MEETING TONIGHT.
SO FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS A PUBLIC HEARING OF SWITZER PRECISION CRAFTED METAL REQUESTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL OF A 17,022 SQUARE FOOT AND A 1,159 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING ADDITIONS TO THE EXISTING BUILDING AT 4 0 2 0 JEFFREY BOULEVARD.
MY NAME IS JIM GANNON FROM SCHNEIDER ARCHITECTURAL.
I HAVE HERE WITH ME STEVE VAL FROM OUR OFFICE, AND ALSO, UH, JASON
UH, WE'RE HERE REPRESENTING SWITZER, UH, MANUFACTURING BACK AFTER A GREAT WORK SESSION A COUPLE WEEKS AGO ON UH, ST.
SO JUST TO REINTRODUCE THE PROJECT, AS YOU STATED CHAIR, THIS PROJECT IS ZONED IN TWO LIGHT INDUSTRIAL PART OF THE ORIGINAL RAVENWOOD INDUSTRIAL PARK OVER ON JEFFREY BOULEVARD.
SWITZER IS LOOKING TO BUILD APPROXIMATELY 17,000 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION IN THE REAR OF THE BUILDING, AND A SMALL INFILL TO THE, UH, NORTH ON THE SIDE OF THE BUILDING HERE.
THEY'RE ALSO PROPOSING TO IMPROVE THEIR FRONT PARKING AREA AND PROVIDE SOME ACCESS TO THE REAR OF THE BUILDING, AGAIN, HIGHLIGHTING THE PROPOSED FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS LANES THAT WE WORKED OUT WITH, UH, THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT, ALSO IMPROVING THE SITE.
WE'RE GOING TO ADD A NEW FIRE PROTECTION SERVICE.
WE'VE RECEIVED GREAT COMMENTS BACK FROM THE TOWN ENGINEER.
WE KNOW THAT THE PROJECT WILL BE RE REVIEWED BY ERIE COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY.
SO WE LOOK FORWARD TO REVIEW, UH, RECEIVING THEIR, UH, POSITIVE FEEDBACK AS WELL BECAUSE WE'RE ADDING SO MUCH HARD SURFACE WITH THE BUILDING AND WITH THE PAVING, WE'VE ADDRESSED THE STORM WATER DESIGN, OBVIOUSLY, TO MEET THE NEW YORK STATE DEC STORMWATER REQUIREMENTS WITH SOME UNDERGROUND RETAINAGE UNDER THE NEW PAVING AREA.
AND WE'VE HIGHLIGHTED TWO BIO FILTERS, ONE ON THE WEST, ONE ON THE EAST, ULTIMATELY DISCHARGING THE SITE AT THE NORTHWEST WHERE IT CURRENTLY DISCHARGES FROM A LANDSCAPING STANDPOINT.
THERE'S MUCH EXISTING LANDSCAPING UP AT THE STREET.
WE'RE ACTUALLY PROPOSING THE ADDITION OF THREE TREES ALONG JEFFREY BOULEVARD TO
[00:35:01]
JUST FURTHER, UH, UH, UH, SPRUCE UP THAT, THAT ENTRYWAY MUCH EXISTING LANDSCAPING AROUND THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING.AND WE'RE ADDING SOME TREES PLANTED ALONG THE NORTH PROPERTY LINE INTO THE NORTH, UH, WEST, RIGHT BEFORE THE STORMWATER OUTFALL.
THOUGHTS, CONCERNS, QUESTIONS OPEN TO IT.
ALRIGHT, ANYBODY, BEFORE WE START THE PUBLIC HEARING, ANYBODY ON THE PLANNING BOARD HAVE ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? UM, I MEAN, I'M, I'M HAPPY THAT THEY'RE ADDING ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING, ESPECIALLY ALONG THE FRONT.
I WOULD JUST WANT CAMMY'S COMMENT AND INPUT AND ANY, UH, YOU KNOW, BUNCH OF LARGE BUILDING AND WATER POSITION.
JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE MANAGING THE 12 WATER OFF THE ROOF, THAT BEING BAND OFF THE TOP.
SO THAT WOULD DEFER TO ING THE, THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT ON THAT.
AND WE DIDN'T GET ANY ENGINEERING COMMENTS FOR ANY OF THE PROJECTS TODAY.
AND NOT THAT WE HAVE ANY APPROVALS PREPARED, SO I GUESS WE DON'T NEED 'EM JUST YET, BUT, RIGHT.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I DIDN'T MISS 'EM.
I CAN, I CAN EMAIL TO THE PEOPLE AT HOME TOMORROW.
YOU GUYS, YOU GUYS HAVE OH, THEY'RE, THEY'RE IN HERE.
YEAH, WE DID RECEIVE, WE DID RECEIVE FEEDBACK FROM KAMI AFTER HER REVIEW OF THE PROJECT.
WE ADDRESSED ALL OF HER CONCERNS, UM, LAST WEEK.
SO SHE'S KIND OF GIVEN HER BLESSING ON THE PROJECT FROM AN ENGINEERING STANDPOINT.
UM, SO FOLLOWING OUR REVIEW COMMENTS ON THE SITE PLAN, ONE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT PROVIDED COMMENTS ON 3 26 21 ON THE FULLY ENGINEERED PLANS, THE STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN, AND THE ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR THE PROJECT, WHICH MUST BE ADDRESSED PRIOR TO THE ENGINEERING APPROVAL.
UM, IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE WE HAVE WHATEVER SHE SENT ON THE 26TH, SO WE DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT, WHAT THOSE COMMENTS WERE.
SO IT'S, WE, WE CAN'T REALLY TELL IF THEY'VE BEEN ADDRESSED YET.
UM, NEW PRIVATE FIRE PROTECTION SERVICE CONNECTION SHALL BE REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY ERIE COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY, AND THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT SHALL REVIEW AND APPROVE THE LANDSCAPING PLAN.
ENGINEERING HAS NO ISSUE WITH THE SITE PLAN AS PROPOSED.
SO BASED ON THAT LAST SENTENCE, I THINK WE CAN ASSUME THAT WHAT SHE SENT ON THE 26TH WAS ADDRESSED, BUT IT WOULDN'T BE, IT, IT WOULDN'T HURT US IF WE SAW WHAT IT WAS AND SAW THAT IT WAS ADDRESSED.
SIR, YOU HAVE A COPY OF THAT THAT WAS, UH, SUBMITTED.
I THINK I MIGHT HAVE BEEN COPIED.
I TYPICALLY DON'T SEND YOU RIGHT CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN THE ENGINEER AND THESE GUYS BACK FORTH.
RIGHT? I DON'T EVEN KNOW IF I'D UNDERSTAND IT IF IT DID GET SENT TO ME.
SO, ANY OTHER COMMENTS? CHAIR? I DISAGREE.
I HAVE A COPY OF HER, COPY OF THE COMMENTS JAMIE GAVE US ALONG WITH OUR RESPONSES IF WE BE, BUT I HAVE 'EM IN AN EMAIL AS WELL.
YEAH, I CAN SEND THEM ALONG IF THEY OKAY.
UM, SO AT THIS TIME I WILL START THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UH, DOES, WHO HAS THE NOTICE? I HAVE THE NOTICE.
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TOWN OF HAMMER PLANNING BOARD WILL CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING ON A PROPOSAL BY SWITZER PRECISION CRAFTED METAL TO CONSTRUCT A 17,022 AND 1,159 FOOT SQUARE FOOT ADDITIONS TO THE EXISTING BUILDING AT 4 0 2 0 JEFFREY BOULEVARD.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD ON APRIL 7TH, 2021 AT 7:00 PM IN ROOM SEVEN B OF HAMBURG TOWN HALL.
AT THIS TIME I WILL OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE WHO WANTED TO SPEAK ABOUT THE SWITZER PRECISION CRAFTED METAL PROJECT? MAKE SURE THERE'S NOBODY BEHIND THE SIGN THERE FOR THE SECOND TIME.
ANYONE HERE FOR OR AGAINST THAT WANTS TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE SWITZER METAL PROJECT FOR THE THIRD AND FINAL TIME? ANYONE HERE THAT HAS ANY COMMENTS ON THE SWITZER METAL? OKAY.
I DON'T SEE ANY COMMENTS POSTED ONLINE.
SO, BEING THAT THERE IS NO COMMENTS, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING
[00:40:06]
ANYTHING OTHER THAN WHAT WE DISCUSSED ABOUT THE ENGINEERING COMMENTS THAT WE THINK WE NEED TO HAVE BEFORE THE NEXT MEETING.BASED ON THAT ONE LINE, THE LAST LINE OF CAMMIE'S, MEMO ENGINEERING HAS NO ISSUE WITH THE SITE PLAN AS PROPOSED.
DO WE FEEL COMFORTABLE HAVING RESOLUTIONS FOR THE NEXT MEETING? ALSO, DON'T FORGET THAT WHEN YOU DO EVERY TIME, YOU KNOW, WHENEVER YOU APPROVE SOMETHING, IT'S ALWAYS CONTINGENT WITH HAN ENGINEERING COMMENTS RIGHT.
ALSO, I'LL SEND THE, UH, PLANNING BOARD, UH, TOMORROW.
A COPY OF THIS IS IN THE RAVENWOOD NORTH INDUSTRIAL PARK.
UH, THE APPLICANT HAS FILLED OUT THE SECTIONS THAT THEY REQUIRE FOR THE FINDINGS ABOUT THE PROJECT.
SO PART OF YOUR DECISION AT THE NEXT MEETING TWO WEEKS FROM NOW, WILL BE FIRST IS THE PROJECT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FINDINGS THAT WERE ISSUED UNDER SEEKER, AND THEN YOUR SECOND RESOLUTION WOULD BE IF YOU FIND IT IN CONFORMANCE, THEN THE SECOND RESOLUTION WOULD BE A RESOLUTION FOR APPROVAL WITH OR WITHOUT ANY CONDITIONS.
UM, I'VE REVIEWED, I JUST GOT IT.
I COULDN'T SEND IT TO YOU LATE, BUT I REVIEWED THE RAVENWOOD NORTH FINDINGS.
I DON'T SEE ANYTHING IN THERE THAT JUMPS OUT ME, THAT THEY'RE NOT IN A CONFORMANCE WITH THE FINDINGS.
THEY'RE DOING EVERYTHING THAT REQUIRED UNDER THE FINDINGS.
BUT PLEASE, THE PLANNING BOARD SHOULD REVIEW IT AND ASK ANY QUESTIONS.
SO I'LL SEND THAT TO YOU TOMORROW.
WELL, YOU SENT US A BLANK ONE.
I SENT YOU A BLANK ONE, BUT THEY HAVE FILLED OUT THE PARTS THAT THEY COULD FILL OUT FOR US.
SO YOU'LL SEE THE INFORMATION ABOUT, ABOUT GREEN SPACE AND, AND NUMBER OF TRUCKS BEING GENERATED, THINGS LIKE THAT.
WHAT IS THE PERCENTAGE OF GREEN SPACE AFTER THIS PROPOSED? THE PROPOSED CHANGES ABOUT JUST ON THE 30%.
YEAH, I, I WOULD SAY I'M COMFORTABLE DREW WITH YOU IF, IF WE CAN GET THAT FORM CIRCULATED YEP.
AND DRAFT RESOLUTIONS FOR THE NEXT MEETING, I THINK THAT WOULD BE GOOD.
SO FOR TWO WEEKS FROM TONIGHT, WE'LL HAVE DRAFT RESOLUTIONS.
IF YOU THINK OF ANYTHING BETWEEN NOW AND THEN, PLEASE LET SARAH KNOW AND SHE WILL LET THE APPLICANTS KNOW IF THERE'S SOMETHING, A CONCERN YOU HAVE THAT YOU WANNA ADDRESS.
SO I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE SWITZER PRECISION CRAFT AND METALS TO APRIL 21ST.
SO WE'LL SEE YOU IN TWO WEEKS.
ALRIGHT, NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS A PUBLIC HEARING OF BROADWAY GROUP REQUESTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL OF A NEW DOLLAR GENERAL STORE TO BE LOCATED ON VACANT LAND EAST OF 40 50 SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD.
SINCE I'VE BEEN ON THAT SCREEN, I KNOW HOW HARD IT IS TO HEAR, SO I'M GONNA JUST STEP FORWARD.
AND, UM, TARA, I DON'T MIND LOOKING AT BACK AT ME.
I'M NOT JUST A VIRTUAL BEING
UM, BUT I AM HERE TONIGHT, UM, FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING OF OUR PROJECT ON SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD.
UM, THE, THE DOLLAR GENERAL STORE.
UM, IT'S A 10,640 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL SPACE.
UM, WE HAVE THE, UM, LANDSCAPING PLAN THAT WE HAVE SHARED WITH YOU AS WELL AS THE, UM, WE'VE COM UM, PREPARED FOR STORM WATER AND, UM, OF COURSE ACCESS THROUGH, UH, THE NICE DOT CURB CUT.
SO, UM, THERE WERE A COUPLE OF REQUESTS FROM THE PLANNING BOARD AT THE LAST MEETING, WHICH I HOPE YOU'VE HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW.
ONE OF THEM WAS A TRAFFIC, UM, OPERATIONS, UM, REPORT THAT WAS PREPARED BY GTS CONSULTING AND, UM, IT CAME BACK AS, UH, BEING A MINIMAL, UM, IMPACT TO TRAFFIC OPERATIONS IN THE AREA.
MINIMAL STACKING, UM, SINCE THE VEHICLES WOULD BE ABLE TO EXIT, UM, THE, THE PROPERTY IN, I THINK THE AVERAGE WAIT TIME WAS LIKE 20 SECONDS.
SO, UM, THAT WAS VERY, UM, VERY GOOD NEWS FOR THE PROJECT.
AND THEN, UM, WE ALSO PREPARED AN EXHIBIT THAT SHOWED OUR PROPERTY KIND OF IN RELATION TO THE ACCESS POINT OF SOME OTHER PROPERTIES.
UM, I HAVE HERE, IN CASE THERE IS ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE, UM, THAT PARTICULARLY WANTED TO SEE MORE ON THE PROJECT, I HAVE A RENDERING OF THE PROPOSED BUILDING, UM, WHICH WE HAVE UPDATED THE FACADE FROM YOUR TRADITIONAL, UM, OR TYPICAL PROTOTYPICAL,
[00:45:01]
UM, STOREFRONT.I HAVE THE LANDSCAPING PLAN BECAUSE I KNOW THAT'S, UM, BEEN AN IMPORTANT FACTOR TO HELP SOFTEN THE LOOK OF ANY KIND OF RETAIL, UM, DEVELOPMENT IN THE AREA.
AND THEN I ALSO HAVE, UM,
SO, UM, THAT IS IT FOR MY BRIEF INTRODUCTION.
AND SO I GUESS IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS, I CAN TRY TO ANSWER THOSE NOW.
I KNOW I, SO BILL, I DID REACH OUT TO THE CONSERVATION ADVISORY BOARD AND TALKED TO, TO, THEY DID REVIEW THE LANDSCAPING PLAN AND HAD NO, NO COMMENTS OR CHANGES WITH THIS PROJECT.
UH, UM, YOU KNOW, THIS WAS THE LAST MEETING.
I DIDN'T, I DON'T THINK I SAW IT IN THE MINUTES.
WE TALKED ABOUT A POTENTIAL CONNECTION TO THE BIRD'S BIKES MM-HMM
BUT HOW THAT WOULD REQUIRE THEM TO EXTEND THEIR PARKING LOT TO THE PROPERTY LINE.
I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING WE SHOULD AT LEAST LOOK INTO.
WHAT WOULD BE THE BEST WAY TO TRY AND DO THAT? I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION OR IF SARAH OR DREW 'CAUSE, BECAUSE WE'D HAVE TO TALK TO SOMEBODY WHO OWNS THE PROPERTY IN BIRD BIKES TO SEE IF THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THEY'D BE INTERESTED IN.
THAT'S HOW WE'D HAVE TO ANY IDEA AND, AND HOW WE CAN FACILITATE SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
I'D AT LEAST LIKE TO HAVE A CONVERSATION, SO, UM, I CAN DO THAT.
I'M NOT SURE WHO OWNS BURS BIKES.
I THINK IT'S THREE BURTS AND A BRYANT, BECAUSE I SAW A CARD THAT HAD LIKE THEIR LOGO ON IT.
SO IT'S ONE OF THE BIRDS TOUR OF BRIAN? YEAH.
D OH, THE, THE, OH, I DIDN'T KNOW THAT.
I, I DON'T KNOW IF I, I FIGURE OUT HOW TO REACH THAT.
I MEAN, IF WE COULD FIGURE THAT OUT.
I, I MEAN I, I WOULD SIT IN ON SOMETHING LIKE THAT IF IT WOULD HELP OR IF IT WOULD HURT.
UM, BUT I, I THINK THAT THAT CONNECTION IS SOMETHING WE SHOULD AT LEAST EXPLORE.
I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU DON'T HAVE CONTROL OVER THE, UH, WHAT THEY WOULD DO.
AND FOR ME PERSONALLY, WHETHER THERE IS A CONNECTION OR NOT DOESN'T, WOULDN'T CHANGE MY ULTIMATE DECISION ON THIS.
BUT I THINK IT WOULD BE SOMETHING GOOD IN THIS PROJECT THAT I THINK WE OWE IT TO THE COMMUNITY TO AT LEAST MAKE THE PHONE CALL AND SEE.
I MEAN, IF THEY TELL US TO GO GET LOST, THEN THEY TELL US TO GET LOST.
BUT IF THEY'RE INTERESTED IN IT, THEN MAYBE WE CAN FACILITATE SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
WHAT WE WOULD DO, THE MINIMUM WE DO IS BUR DIDN'T AGREE TO IT AT THIS POINT, MR. DUNN.
UM, BASICALLY WE WOULD JUST ASK THE APPLICANT TO, AS PART OF IT, AGREE THE DOT WOULD LIKE TO SEE IN THE FUTURE THAT, THAT THEY WOULD AGREE TO CROSS ACCESS AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE IF IT WAS WARRANTED.
IF BURT EVER CAME IN WITH A CHANGE TO THEIR PLAN, WE WOULD STIPULATE THAT BECAUSE IT IS IN THE, IN THE CODE, WE'RE TRYING TO DO THE JOB OF DOT AND THE TOWN'S GOALS OF DOING ACCESS MANAGEMENT THE LEAST, THE BETTER THAT PEOPLE CAN MOVE BETWEEN SITES.
THEY DON'T HAVE TO MAKE THAT LEFT TURNS IN AND OUT OF FACILITIES.
AND I, I, I THINK MAYBE I'M WRONG, BUT I THINK IT MIGHT MAKE SENSE FOR A BICYCLE SHOP.
I MEAN, THEY'D BUY A BIKE AND THEN THEY RIDE IT OVER THE STORE AND GET SOME SNACKS AND GO ON THEIR WAY.
BECAUSE THEN EVENTUALLY THAT WHOLE CAR WILL BE RIGHT.
AND, AND IT IS NOT AS IF THEY'RE COMPETITORS USUALLY THE RIGHT, THE THE STICKING POINT IS, WELL, I'M NOT GONNA HAVE IT CONNECT TO ANOTHER PLACE THAT SELLS BICYCLES AND THAT THAT WOULDN'T APPLY HERE.
SO, AND TO YOUR POINT, THAT WOULD BE OUR SAME CONCERN.
WHAT IF SPIKES DECIDED TO CHANGE THEIR BUSINESS MODEL? WHAT IF THEY WANTED TO REDEVELOP THAT BANT LOT INTO SOMETHING THAT WAS A COMPETITIVE USE FOR US? AND SO, UM, OUR CLIENT AS WELL WOULD WANT TO HAVE, UM, SOME RESTRICTIONS OKAY.
AGAINST COMPETITIVE USES AND NOXIOUS USES.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T MIND TO MAKE A GOOD FAITH EFFORT TO SPEAK WITH THE, UM, OWNERS, BUT THOSE WOULD HAVE TO BE CONDITIONS AS WELL OF AN AGREEMENT SO THAT BOTH PARTIES WOULD FEEL LIKE IT WAS AN EQUITABLE, UM, AGREEMENT.
AND VICE VERSA, BERT DOESN'T WANNA SEE YOU PUT IN A BIKE SHOP NEXT DOOR.
THOSE ARE TYPICAL ACCESS AGREEMENTS WHERE THEY AGREE THAT THERE ARE SOME LANGUAGE OF RESTRICTIONS WE'RE NOT GONNA PROVIDE ACCESS TO SOMETHING WE THINK IS GONNA BE DETRIMENTAL TO OUR BUSINESS.
SO WE DON'T WANNA HOLD YOUR PROJECT UP.
WE'LL TRY TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION WITH, WITH, WITH, UH, BERT SPIKES OBVIOUSLY IT, IT CAN'T BE ACCOMPLISHED NOW, BUT AT LEAST GET SOME FORM OF AGREEMENT FROM, WE'LL WORK THROUGH JENNIFER, THE TOWN ATTORNEY TO SOME COURT AGREEMENT THAT YOU WOULD NOT OPPOSE IT.
THAT YOU WOULD ALLOW THAT AS LONG AS YOU HAD THOSE STIPULATIONS THAT IT WAS NOT COMPETITIVE.
THEY'VE DONE A LOT OF THAT WORK ON TRANSIT ROAD AND, AND AM HER AND CLARENCE AND THEY'RE JUST TRYING TO MAKE THAT LONG TERM BE SUCCESSFUL FOR EVERYBODY.
I JUST, I MEAN, I THINK IT'S SOMETHING WE, WE AT LEAST SHOULD CALL SOMEBODY AND SAY, HEY,
[00:50:01]
OR CAN WE DO THIS? SO WELL MAYBE BETWEEN, BETWEEN TARA AND I WE CAN FIGURE OUT TOOLS, BUT THERE YOU GO.I WAS JUST GONNA SAY, LINKEDIN SAYS THAT BURT DUNN IS THE PRESIDENT AT BURT SPIKES AND FITNESS, SO THAT'S PROBABLY A GOOD PLACE TO START.
I WOULD JUST HAVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW I'LL WORK ON IT.
BOB, YOU KNOW HIS NUMBER
ANY OTHER COMMENTS BEFORE WE START THE PUBLIC HEARING? ALRIGHT, UH, SO MEGAN, DO YOU HAVE THE NOTICE ON THIS ONE? I SURE DO.
NOTICE, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD WILL CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING ON A PROPOSAL BY THE BROADWAY GROUP TO CONSTRUCT A DOLLAR GENERAL STORE AND VACANT LAND EAST OF 4 0 5 0 SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD ON APRIL 7TH, 2021 AT 7:00 PM IN ROOM SEVEN B AT HAMBURG TIME.
AT THIS TIME I'LL OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE WHO WANTED TO SPEAK ON THE BROADWAY GROUP PROJECT? ALRIGHT, FOR THE SECOND TIME, ANYONE HERE WILLING TO, WANTING TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE BROADWAY GROUP DOLLAR GENERAL FOR THE THIRD AND FINAL TIME? ANYONE HAVE ANY COMMENTS ON THE BROADWAY GROUP FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING? OKAY.
AND THERE'S ALSO NO COMMENTS ONLINE.
SO BEING THAT WE HAD NO COMMENTS HERE IN PERSON AND NO COMMENTS ONLINE AND I DON'T THINK WE'VE GOT ANY COMMENTS FROM THE MAIL ON THIS PROJECT, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
I WILL ASK MY QUESTION THAT I ALWAYS ASK AT END.
BILL WAS PROBABLY GONNA ASK IT, IS THERE ANYTHING ADDITIONAL YOU NEED FROM THE APPLICANT OR FROM OUR OFFICES OR THE TOWN ENGINEER? AND THEN THE SECOND PART OF THAT QUESTION IS, DO YOU WANT US TO PREPARE DRAFT RESOLUTIONS FOR AT LEAST YOU TO CONSIDER? IT DOESN'T MEAN YOU HAVE TO ACT ON 'EM TWO WEEKS, BUT AT LEAST CONSIDER AND START FRAMING THAT APPROVAL.
THERE'S GONNA BE A, YOU HAVE TO ISSUE A SECRET DECISION AND YOU HAVE TO ISSUE SITE PLAN APPROVAL, JUST THOSE TWO ISSUES.
SO THOSE ARE THE ITEMS I'M ASKING.
SO, SO FIRST ITEM, ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT WE NEED? NO, I DON'T THINK SO.
OTHER THAN THE ACCESS ISSUE, WE'RE GONNA RIGHT.
ARE WE OKAY WITH DRAFT RESOLUTIONS? DOESN'T MEAN WE HAVE TO VOTE ON IT, BUT IT MEANS WE COULD.
SO LET'S DO SOME DRAFT RESOLUTIONS FOR THE NEXT MEETING.
AND, UH, UNLESS THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE ON THIS PROJECT, I'LL MOVE TO TABLE BROADWAY GROUP TO APRIL 21ST.
SO WE'LL SEE YOU IN TWO WEEKS, EITHER HERE OR THERE.
NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS A PUBLIC HEARING ODOR STOP REQUESTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL OF A 15,373 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING TO BE CONSTRUCTED ON VACANT LAND, LOCATED AT 5 1 3 9 SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD.
MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, ROB D DANEK FROM SWA AND CLARK'S OFFICE.
UH, OUR OFFICE IS LOCATED AT 3 5 5 6 LAKESHORE ROAD IN HAMBURG AND WE'RE HERE THIS EVENING ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER MIKE SCHMIDT IN REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL AND A SECRET DETERMINATION FOR THE 15,000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING HE'S PROPOSING TO BUILD 51 39 SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD.
UH, WE WERE HERE IN FRONT OF THE BOARD ON THE 17TH.
THE BOARD CHOSE TO SET A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS EVENING, UH, AS WE'VE INDICATED BEFORE.
AND BY THE WAY, MR. CHAIRMAN, I, I DID GET SOME INFORMATION ABOUT THE SKUNK.
[00:55:01]
CAR DOESN'T SMELL ANYMORE AS THE TIME ISODOR STUFF IS IN THE BUSINESS OF AIR PURIFIERS, UH, THAT ARE USED TO ELIMINATE ODORS LIKE TOBACCO SMOKE, UH, PET ODORS, FOOD MOLD AND MILDEW GARBAGE AND MORE.
I I DID WANNA MAKE ONE CLARIFICATION LAST MONTH.
I MISSPOKE WHEN I, UH, SAID HOW MANY TRUCK DELIVERIES THEY RECEIVED.
THEY ONLY RECEIVED TWO TO FOUR TRUCK DELIVERIES PER MONTH.
I, I THINK I SAID SOMETHING LIKE 10 PER WEEK.
AND THEY'RE, AGAIN, THEY'RE TYPICALLY STANDARD UPS PANEL TRUCKS THAT, UH, THEY RECEIVE THEIR DELIVERIES.
UM, WE HAVE RECEIVED COMMENTS FROM THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, WHICH ARE IN THE PROCESS OF ADDRESSING.
WE HAVE DEVELOPED A LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR THE PROJECT.
I DON'T KNOW IF WE SUBMITTED FORM YOUR OFFICE.
BUT THAT HAS TO BE REVIEWED BY THE COUNTY DEPARTMENT ANYWAY.
SO, UM, AGAIN, WE ARE SEEKING SITE PLAN APPROVAL.
I DON'T KNOW IF THE 30 DAY PERIOD IS CLOSED, YOU ARE CONDUCTING A COORDINATED REVIEW AND I DON'T KNOW IF THAT 30 DAYS HAS CLOSED AS OF THIS MEETING.
UM, IF THERE'S ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS, YOU'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM.
SO WHAT WAS THE ANSWER OF THE SKUNK THING? IN CASE MY WIFE HITS MY HAND
HE SAID HE'D BE ABLE TO HELP YOU.
I TOLD HIM IT HAPPENED AND HE SAID IF IT EVER HAPPENS, HE'D BE ABLE TO HELP YOU OUT BECAUSE NOW I'M WONDERING IF MAYBE, YOU KNOW, YOU JUST GET USED TO THE SMELL.
NO, AND MY CAR STILL SMELLS LIKE A SKY AND I JUST DON'T KNOW IT.
UM, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE PLANNING BOARD BEFORE WE OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING? DID WE RECEIVE A PART ONE OF THE EAF FOR THIS PROJECT? YES.
IT'S, IT WAS SUBMITTED AND, AND IT IS BEEN RECEIVED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND WAS SUBMITTED OUT FOR COORDINATED REVIEW.
ALL THE COMMENTS HAVE NOT BEEN RECEIVED YET.
WE SENT IT OUT THREE WEEKS AGO.
I WAS NO, BUT WELL RIGHT, BUT HAVE IT MEMO SAYS THAT HE HAS NOT SEEN THE EAF, SO I JUST, SARAH SEND IT OUT.
I THOUGHT WE HAD IT AND THEN I GOT CONFUSED BY THE MEMO.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS BEFORE WE START THE PUBLIC HEARING? NO.
MRS. CONFER NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD WILL CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING ON A PROPOSAL BY MICHAEL SCHMIDT TO CONSTRUCT A NEW OFFICE SLASH WAREHOUSE BUILDING FOR ODORS STOCK TO BE LOCATED AT 5,139 SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD ON APRIL 7TH, 2021 AT 7:00 PM IN ROOM SEVEN B OF HAMBURG TOWN HALL.
ALRIGHT, AT THIS TIME I WILL OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ODOR STOP.
DOES ANYONE HERE HAVE ANY COMMENTS FOR ODORS? STOP CHECK TO MAKE SURE ANY KIND OF SIGN THERE.
ANY COMMENTS FOR OR AGAINST THE ODOR STOP PROJECTS FOR THE THIRD AND FINAL TIME? ANY COMMENTS ON ODOR? STOP.
OKAY, SO WE HAVE NO COMMENTS IN PERSON.
WE ALSO HAVE NO COMMENTS ONLINE.
SO AT THIS TIME I WILL CLOSE THE HEARING AND I JUST HAD ONE QUESTION, BILL.
ROB, I THINK YOU ANSWERED IT LAST TIME BUT I DIDN'T WRITE IT DOWN.
UM, THE LOCK COVERAGE, ARE YOU UNDER 85% I THINK? YEP.
I KNOW YOU ANSWERED IN A PREVIOUS MEETING.
YEAH, YOU COULD JUST MAKE SURE THAT'S LESS.
I AM GLAD YOU ASKED THAT DREW.
I HAD THAT IN MY NOTES AND I DIDN'T ASK IT 'CAUSE IT WAS WASTE OF TIME DISCUSS.
RIGHT? IT WASN'T IN THE SHEET.
IN THE SHEET OR WHEN SOMEONE OKAY, WE WILL ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
ALRIGHT, SO WE, UH, THE, THE ONLY ONE TOO, SARAH,
[01:00:01]
I, I'M ASSUMING THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT YOU'VE WORKED AT FIRE ACCESS IS FINE AROUND THIS BUILDING.SO JUST CHECK WITH THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT, MAKE SURE I SUBMITTED IT TO ROGER IF YOU DIDN'T HAVE ANY.
WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED ANY COMMENTS FROM BUILDING JUST FROM CAM.
I I DON'T HAVE A L CASE INCLUDED.
SO AM I CORRECT IN THE, THE SEE TIMEFRAME TO GET THE RESPONSES GOES UNTIL APRIL 16TH? THAT WOULD BE THE 30 DAYS FROM ACTUALLY I THINK IT'S LATER THAN THAT.
YEAH, BECAUSE THAT, THAT WAS OUR MEETING.
SO IT WOULDN'T START UNTIL WHENEVER YOU SENT IT OUT, WHICH WOULD BE A FEW DAYS LATER, LATER.
UM, BUSINESS DAYS ARE, ARE THOSE BUSINESS DAYS? 30 WOULDN'T BE JUST BUSINESS DAYS, YOU KNOW, FAILURE DAYS.
SO THE, UH, THE CRUX OF THE QUESTION WAS WHETHER IT'S GONNA BE BEFORE OR AFTER THE 21ST.
REMEMBER THE 30 DAYS IS AN OPPORTUNITY DIRECTORY, NOT MANDATORY.
IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY ACTUALLY ESTABL AGENCY IN 30 DAYS.
SO IF WE'RE CLOSE ENOUGH TO THAT AND WE'VE HEARD REMEMBER THEY'RE, THEY'RE NOT ANY APPROVAL AGENCIES OBVIOUSLY TO OBJECT.
UH, IF WE, IF WE'RE WAITING FOR SOME SPECIFIC COMMENT THEN WE WOULDN'T ACT ON IT.
SOMETIMES THE DC WILL SAY, HEY, WE NEED MORE TIME.
I DID GET SOME, I GOT SOMETHING BACK FROM THE, FROM THE UH, ENVIRONMENT PLANNING.
THEY HAVE NO, NO RECOMMENDATION, NO COMMENT.
AND I ALSO GOT SOMETHING FROM THE DEC WITH NO COMMENTS.
SO WHO ELSE? THE ONLY AGENCY I, IF THEY HAVE ANY COMMENTS, HAVE YOU SPOKEN TO THE DOT? WE HAVE NOT.
THE
I'M JUST SAYING IF YOU WANNA PUT IT ON FOR TWO WEEKS, UM, WE'LL BE FAIRLY CLOSE TO 30 DAYS.
I THINK DOT'S, THE ONLY OTHER REALLY ONE THAT I WOULD REACH OUT TO, WE'VE HEARD FROM THE COUNTY, WE'VE HEARD FROM DC AND THE COMMENTS THAT WE RECEIVED TODAY FROM ENGINEERING HAVE BEEN VERY MINOR.
AND UH, WE EXPECT THAT WE ABLE TO ADDRESS THOSE BETWEEN NOW AND THE NEXT MEETING.
UM, SO WHAT ARE THE BOARD MEMBERS THINKING ABOUT THAT? DO WE FEEL COMFORTABLE HAVING THEM COME BACK ON THE 21ST? I WOULD WAIT IF WE DON'T THINK THE PERIOD'S ENDING UNTIL THE 23RD.
I WOULD, YOU KNOW, PERHAPS WE JUST WAIT UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING.
IF WE'RE NOT, I DON'T THINK WE'RE ASKING ANYTHING ELSE OF THEM THE INTERIM, BUT PERHAPS HAVE FIRST MEETING IN MAY AND PERHAPS HAVE THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT RESOLUTIONS.
SO WE GOT, UH, YOU'RE OKAY WITH THAT 30 DAY ALRIGHT.
PUT HER ON THE FIRST MEETING IN MAY.
SO I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE ODOR STOP TO MAY 5TH AND ALSO, UH, REQUESTING THAT THE TOWN PLANNING DEPARTMENT DRAFT PROPOSED RESOLUTIONS FOR THAT MEETING ON MAY 5TH.
SO WE WILL SEE YOU IN ON THE FIFTH.
NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS SCHULTZ TOWING.
THIS WAS A PROJECT WE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED, BUT IT SEEMS AFTER, UH, DISCUSSIONS WITH CODE ENFORCEMENT, THERE'S SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT WE INTENDED WHEN WE APPROVED IT AND ALSO THE APPLICANT HAS TAKEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE SOME MINOR CHANGES TO THAT PLAN.
WE MADE MINOR CHANGES AND, AND ROGER WANTED US TO GOOD EVENING.
UM, ON THERE, YOU CAN SEE ACTUALLY I MADE THE IMPOUND LOT SMALLER.
ONCE I PURCHASED THE PROPERTY WAS THERE, I REALIZED
[01:05:01]
HOW MUCH ROOM ACTUALLY BEHIND THE BUILDING THAT I OWN, I DECIDED TO ACTUALLY USE THE BUILDINGS TO ADD PART OF THE FENCE IN BETWEEN THE TWO BUILDINGS.I'M GONNA PUT A GATE AND THEN START AT EACH CORNER OF THE BUILDING, FOLLOW THE PERIMETER OF THE PROPERTY BEFORE I WAS COMING OUT 60 FEET FROM THE ONE BACK BUILDING.
I DON'T NEED ALL THAT ROOM TO BE HOW LOCKED.
OKAY, SO CAN, DID WE GET THIS AHEAD OF TIME? YEAH, WE DID.
SO, UM, AND IT SAYS EXISTING GRAVEL.
LET ME SEE WHAT YOU GOT THERE.
NOW THIS, THIS ISN'T EXISTING GRAVEL, RIGHT? RIGHT.
THAT'S WHAT I WAS GONNA, THIS WAS EXISTING.
I ACTUALLY HAVE A SLIGHT PLANT FROM 1989 THAT SHOWS THIS, THIS IS WHAT I WANTED TO CHANGE, RIGHT? BECAUSE, SO WE GOT ADDITIONAL STONE BEING ADDED TO THE EXISTING DRIVEWAY AND THEN THE INSIDE PART IS GOING TO BE, I WANNA GET RID OF THE GOLF COURSE PARK THERE.
IT'S JUST CONCRETE PADS FROM WHERE THEY HIT THE GOLF COURSE, THE ACTUAL COURSE, UM, YEARS DOWN THE ROAD, I WOULD LIKE TO PUT A SHOP UP JUST TO STORE MY TRUCKS IN OVERNIGHT AND STUFF LIKE THAT.
SO WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS BASICALLY GET RID OF WHAT'S THERE TO PUT GRAVEL DOWN.
SO THIS FIGHT WORK IS BASICALLY DONE FOR DOWN THE ROAD WHEN I, IT'S TIME TO DO THE BUILDING AND I COME BACK HERE.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE ASSUMED LAST TIME BECAUSE THERE'S, THERE'S ONLY CERTAIN, UH, MATERIALS THAT ARE PERMITTED.
AND I, I THINK WHEN WE DID THE APPROVAL, WE, WE ASSUMED YOU'D USE ONE OF THEM AND THEN ROGER SAID, WELL THERE'S, IT'S THE GOLF COURSE.
AND UH, I THINK THERE WAS SOME TYPE OF MISCOMMUNICATION ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT IT WAS GONNA BE CHANGED.
UP FRONT, RIGHT? DOES THAT HAVE ANY UTILITIES? WELL, IT WOULD'VE HAD ELECTRIC ALREADY IF THE WINDSTORM WOULDN'T BLOWN MY POLE DOWN.
UM, ACTUALLY IT'S GONNA HAVE ELECTRICITY TOMORROW.
THE WATER'S ALREADY TURNED ON IN IT.
UM, THERE'S SEPTIC THERE, SO YES, IT HAS ALL UTILITIES.
UM, THEY WOULD'VE HAD THE POWER ON LAST WEEK, BUT GUESS WOULD START MOVING.
UM, ALSO HERE IS, THIS IS FROM 1989 BEFORE THEY BUILT THE SECOND BUILDING THAT YOU SEE HERE.
RIGHT? THIS IS ALL EXISTING GRAVEL ALL THROUGH HERE.
THE ONLY PLACE AT THAT TIME THEY WERE ADDING GRAVEL WAS HERE.
SO THIS WAS ALL RIGHT GRAVEL HERE WHERE I PUT THE STONE IN.
NOW THAT PARKING LOT DRIVE MADE MORE FOR CARS AND LIGHT PICKUP TRUCKS.
AND AS WE DROVE ON IT, IT PUSHED, SO I
UM, BASICALLY THAT THE ONLY CHANGE I HAVE IS WHERE I WANTED PUT THE IMPOUND LOT.
STILL SAME SPOT, JUST ACTUALLY LITTLE BIT, A LITTLE SMALLER USING THE BUILDINGS.
SO THIS, THIS STORAGE UNIT IN THE BACK, THAT'S GONNA BECOME PART OF THE FENCE, RIGHT? WHAT IS, WHAT'S THAT BUILDING LIKE RIGHT NOW? WHAT DO YOU MEAN? IT'S LIKE, IS IS IT, UH, IS IT A SOLID BUILDING? IS IT RUN DOWN, FALLING DOWN? OH NO, IT'S NOT RIGHT.
I ACTUALLY FIXED THE ROOF ON THE ONE.
UM, AND IT NEEDS, YOU KNOW, A LITTLE MAINTENANCE.
I MEAN, IT'S BEEN PROBABLY, I DON'T EVEN KNOW HOW LONG THAT BUSINESS HAS BEEN CLOSED DOWN.
UM, IT'S A, IT'S ACTUALLY THEY'RE VERY SOLID BUILDINGS.
UM, I PLAN ON PAINTING THEM AND UTILIZING THEM AS FOR THE 20 BUSINESS.
'CAUSE THAT'S WHERE WE STORE THE CARS.
IF, YOU KNOW, OTHER TIMES I'D RATHER PUT 'EM IN THE BUILDINGS AND PUT 'EM OUT IN THE LOT.
BECAUSE THEY'RE OUTSIDE ON THE MINE, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING STUPID LIKE A HAILSTORM COMES THROUGH.
RIGHT? I MEAN, THERE WILL BE VEHICLES IN THE IMPOUNDED COURSE, BUT IT'S UTILIZED FOR THE BUSINESS.
THE ONE, ONE OF THE STORAGE UNITS, THE VERY FIRST ONE YOU COME UP TO IS WHERE I KEEP ALL OF OUR EQUIPMENT LIKE BATTERIES AND FLOOR DRY AND STUFF LIKE THAT FOR BUSINESS.
ANYBODY ELSE INSIDE FROM ENGINEERING ON THE GRAVEL OR THE STONE? I CAN READ, I CAN READ TO YOU WHAT TAMMY WROTE IF YOU, IF YOU WOULD LIKE SARAH.
HOW COME WE DON'T HAVE THOSE PRIOR TO THE MEETING? I JUST GOT THEM A FEW DAYS AGO.
IT JUST MAKES IT HARD TO BE ADEQUATELY PREPARED.
[01:10:02]
UH, SHE SAYS, UH, THE SITE ENTRANCE INCLUDES AN EXISTING CONCRETE APRON AT THE ROADWAY AND AN EXISTING GRAVEL DRIVEWAY.THE IMPROVEMENT OF THE DRIVEWAY USING GRAVEL IS ALLOWED HOWEVER, NO GRADES ARE PROVIDED AND THE DRIVEWAY CANNOT CAUSE RUNOFF TO LEAVE THE SITE ONTO ADJACENT PROPERTIES.
THEREFORE, THE IMPROVEMENTS MUST MAINTAIN POSITIVE DRAINAGE AWAY FROM THE SITE FOUNDRY.
SO TO CONTINUE IS OTHERWISE SWES MAY BE REQUIRED TO CONTROL RUNOFF.
SO I THINK WE NEED A GRADING PLAN THEN THAT SHOWS THAT FOR OUR RECORDS AND FOR DOCUMENTATION THAT SHOWS THE GRADE OF THE DRIVEWAY SLOPING SO THAT IT IS SHOWING THAT IT COMES BACK ON SITE, RIGHT? BECAUSE COMMENTS? YEAH.
ONE THING CAMMY SAID, I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS AT ONE OF OUR MEETINGS OR SOMETHING ELSE, I THOUGHT IT WAS, WAS REALLY INTERESTING, THE CONCRETE GRAVEL, THE, YOU KNOW, THE LITTLE SHARP PIECES THEY FIT TOGETHER AND WHEN YOU DRIVE ON AND THEY FITTING TOGETHER SO TIGHTLY THAT THE RUNOFF ISN'T MUCH DIFFERENT THAN AN ASPHALT PARKING LOT.
SO I, I KIND OF ASSUMED THAT THE GRAVEL, THE WATER WOULD GO THROUGH IT SO YOU WOULDN'T HAVE AS MUCH OF A RUNOFF ISSUE.
BUT THAT'S, THAT'S NOT THE CASE.
SO THE GRAVEL THAT I HAVE IN THE DRIVEWAY ISN'T ALL, IT'S ALL, IT'S CHOOSE THREES AND FOURS CLEAN STONE.
WITH SOME YOU SAY THAT'D BE MORE PERMEABLE THEN? YEAH, IT'S, I MEAN YOU'RE TALKING TWO INCH, THREE FOUR INCH ROUND STONE.
THERE IS SOME PRESSURE RUN MIXED IN WITH IT.
BUT IT'S NOT ALL PRESSURE RUN.
ALSO, UM, DON'T FORGET, LIKE I KEEP SAYING WHEN YOU APPROVE IT IS, UM RIGHT, IT'S, AND TAMMY WON'T SIGN OFF UNTIL SHE'S COMFORTABLE WITH THE DRAINAGE
AS, AS FAR AS THE IMPOUND AREA THAT'S THERE, THE PLAN IS TO DO THE SAME THING THEY DID WITH THE DRIVEWAY.
THERE IT IS SLOPED DOWN AND THERE'S DRAINAGE THERE.
THERE'S A BIG DRAIN PIPE THAT GOES THROUGH AND THERE'S DRAINAGE RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE ONE STORAGE BUILDING THAT'S THERE IN THE FRONT OR THE BACK.
THE BACK AREA IS SUPPOSED TO BE FENCED TOO.
THAT'S WHAT I'M WORKING AT BECAUSE I'M WAS AFTER, LIKE I SAID, AFTER I GOT THERE, I REALIZED IT DIDN'T WANT IT AS BIG AS IT'S PLUS WITH THE WAY THE WEATHER'S BEEN, IT, THIS IS THE FIRST, IT'S ACTUALLY BECOMING DECENT ENOUGH TO DO ANYTHING WITH THAT.
UM, I DID SHOWS THAT I'M CHANGING WHERE THE FENCE WAS GONNA BE TO WHERE IT'S GONNA BE NOW.
SO THE VEHICLES THAT HAVE BEEN STORED ON THAT PROPERTY UP UNTIL NOW, THEN ARE ALL YOUR PERSONAL VEHICLES, ANY VEHICLE THAT IT HAS NOT BEEN MY PERSONAL VEHICLE HAS BEEN ENCLOSED IN THE BUILDING.
AND THEN DO WE HAVE ANY LANDSCAPE THAT'S GOING IN AROUND IT OR NO? UM, THERE WILL BE.
I DON'T HAVE A LANDSCAPE PLAN RIGHT NOW.
I'M TRYING TO GET MY, YOU KNOW, HAVE WRAP AROUND EVERYTHING ELSE I HAVE TO DO WITH THIS PROPERTY.
UM, OBVIOUSLY, YOU KNOW, THERE'S SOME TREES AND STUFF THERE.
NOW I, LIKE I SAID, I DON'T HAVE A CLAIM AS FAR AS LANDSCAPING GOES, BUT THERE WILL BE IF YOU, IF YOU GO PAST MY REPAIR SHOP, IT'S JUST DOWN THE ROAD FROM THIS PROPERTY.
I HAVE LANDSCAPING THERE AND IT'S ALWAYS WELL MAINTAINED THIS PROBABILITY, WHETHER IT'LL BE MAINTAINED.
IT'S JUST THERE SHOULD BE A LANDSCAPING PLAN THAT WAS SUBMITTED WITH IT.
DID WE HAVE ONE LAST TIME? WE DIDN'T HAVE ONE BEFORE.
UM, SO I HAVE ONE OTHER QUESTION ABOUT, I, I KNOW THAT BASED ON THE COMMERCE CAM, LIKELY ON A GRADING PLAN, THAT SOUNDS LIKE A LANDSCAPING PLAN, BUT DO YOU HAVE A LIGHTING PLAN AS WELL OR WAS THERE NO LIGHTING? I'M TRYING TO RECALL THIS.
I, I DIDN'T PUT ANYTHING ON LIGHTING BECAUSE THERE'S ALREADY LIGHTING THERE, BUT THAT CHANGED SINCE LAST WEEK WHEN THE WIND BLEW MY LIGHT POLES DOWN.
SO YOU HAD LIGHTING THEN I, YEAH, THERE WILL BE SOME LIGHTING THERE.
I MEAN, I'LL COME TO FIND OUT WHAT IS ACCEPTABLE.
SAME THING I'M DOING WITH THE, THE OFFICE SPACE I'M DOING UP FRONT.
I'M GETTING A PLAN WITH IT, AND THEN I'M COMING TO FIND OUT WHAT IS OKAY AND WHAT'S NOT.
I, I, I'M NOT GONNA DO ANYTHING.
UM, TYPICALLY, WELL, ORIGINALLY THERE WAS SOME LIGHTS ON POLES.
THEY WERE ALMOST BUILT WITH STREET LIGHTS THAT JUST SHINED OVER THE DRIVEWAY.
AND LIKE I SAID, NOW I ONLY HAVE ONE POLE LEFT OUT THREE.
SO, UM, I KIND OF HAVE TO REFIGURE WHAT I'M GONNA DO AS FAR AS LIGHTING GOES.
I SAW SOMETHING ON THE ENGINEERING THAT SAID SOMETHING ABOUT, UM, DARK SKY APPROVAL OR SOMETHING.
I'M NOT SURE WHAT THAT MEANS, BUT I'M GUESSING THAT WE DON'T WANNA LET LITTLE SKY WITH THE FOOTBALL FIELD, JUST YEAH.
[01:15:01]
SPEAKING OF THAT, THERE'S A PROPERTY RIGHT NEXT TO MY REPAIR SHOP THAT, UM, NEIL KEVIN WAS DEVELOPING.IS IT LIGHTING LIKE THAT, THAT HE HAS IT JUST SHIELDED LIGHTING ON A POLE SHOULD BE, HE SHOULDN'T BE ABLE TO DEVELOP SOMETHING WITH LIGHT THAT SHINES ONTO YOUR PROPERTY.
AND, UM, THAT'S WHAT I FIGURED.
SO AS LONG AS HE'S FOLLOWING THE RELEASE STRIPE, THEN IT SHOULD BE OKAY.
SO, SO WE WE'RE ON A GRADING LANDSCAPING LIGHT PLAN.
YOU ALSO WANT TO, ARE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT YOU, WHAT'S PERMISSIBLE IN THE OFFICE.
WELL, BASICALLY I WANT, IT'S BASICALLY DONE.
I MEAN, THERE ISN'T MUCH IN THERE.
THERE'S REMNANTS OF A BATHROOM AND, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A, A LOOK AT ENTRANCE FOR YOUR WALL.
I'M GONNA HAVE, UM, AN ARCHITECT DRAW IT OFF SO WE CAN SEE HOW EVERYTHING IS LOCATED.
HOW MUCH TIME DO YOU NEED TO, TO GET THOSE PLANS TOGETHER FOR THIS? UM, I'D LIKE TWO WEEKS TO A MONTH TO, I, I WANNA FIGURE EVERYTHING SO I HAVE IT ALL RIGHT.
SO YOU WANT TO COME BACK ON MAY 5TH OR MAY 19TH? MAY 5TH SHOULD BE FINE.
AND BY THE WAY, MR. WHALE CAN ADD, I DON'T NEED SEPARATE PLANS THAT THE SIMPLE SITE PLAN I NEED.
JUST SHOW THE LANDSCAPING ON THIS PLAN, SHOW WHERE THE LIGHTING'S GONNA BE PUT, AND THEN WORK WITH CAMEO ON WHAT SHE NEEDS TO MAKE SURE YOU'RE SHOWING POSITIVE DRAINAGE OR WEIGHT FROM THE ADJOINING PROPERTY.
BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT GRADING ANYTHING ELSE OTHER THAN ANY ADDITIONAL STONE HERE.
RIGHT? WELL, THAT AREA HERE, RIGHT.
YOU'RE GONNA PUT GRAVEL IN THERE.
SO SHE'LL WANNA SEE SOME LEVEL OF PLAN FROM HERE, BUT FROM OUR STANDPOINT, YOU CAN ADD THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING AND THINGS LIKE THAT ONTO THIS SHEET.
ANYTHING ELSE WE THINK WE NEED, MIKE.
SO I WILL, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE SCHU TOWING TO MAY 5TH.
A MOTION BY MR. CLARK, SECOND BY MR. FER.
YES, I JUST, I JUST EMAILED THE ENGINEERING COMMENTS FOR THOSE OF YOU AT HOME.
NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS BOSTON STATE HOLDINGS.
CO LLC REQUESTING PLANNING BOARD APPROVAL OF A REVISED SITE PLAN FOR THE VILLAGE AT CEDAR VALLEY TO BE LOCATED NORTH OF EAST PLEASANT AVENUE, WEST OF THRUWAY.
ORIGINAL SITE PLAN APPROVAL WAS GRANTED ON JULY 15TH, 2015.
SO, SO YEAH, WAY BACK JULY 15TH, 2015, ONE, WE APPROVED MULTIFAMILY HOUSING AS PART OF THE OVERALL DEVELOPMENT IN THIS AREA, AND IT WAS GONNA BE A PHASED CONSTRUCTION.
AND BEFORE GOING TO THE PHASE OF THE MULTIFAMILY, THEY'RE COMING IN HERE AND ASKING TO CHANGE WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED.
SO THEY'RE, YOU'RE NOT REALLY ASKING FOR NEW MULTIFAMILY HOUSING, YOU'RE ASKING US TO CHANGE SOMETHING THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED? UH, YEAH.
CHAIRMAN CLARK AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING BOARD WILL APPEAR VIRTUALLY SEAN HOPKINS.
I'M HERE THIS EVENING ON BEHALF OF THE A, ALSO WITH ME ON BEHALF OF PROJECT SCHNEIDER ARCHITECT ROB FROM NUSSBAUMER AND CLARK, AND BOTH JEFF AND JOE RUSO.
AS CHAIRMAN CLARK INDICATED IN HIS INTRODUCTORY COMMENTS, THIS IS ACTUALLY AN UPDATE TO A PLAN THAT WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED ON JULY 15TH, 2015.
THE SITE PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED BY THIS BOARD CONSISTED OF 144 UNITS.
THE MAIN REASON WE GOT DELAYED AT THAT POINT IS WE HAD TO FIND A SOLUTION OFFSITE FOR SANITARY SEWER.
WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME GOING BACK AND FORTH WITH THE THROUGHWAY AUTHORITY, BUT BELIEVE OR NOT WE WERE CONSIDERING PIP, THE SANITARY SEWER UNDER THE THROUGHWAY AUTHORITY.
THE GOVERNMENT COULD IMAGINE HOW COMPLEX AND COSTLY THAT WOULD BE.
ULTIMATELY, WE WERE ABLE TO REACH AN AGREEMENT WITH THE NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR BENDERSON.
AND FINALLY, WE WERE ABLE TO GET SANITARY SEWER ACCESS FOR THIS SITE.
BASED ON THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT TOOK IN THE COST IT TOOK, IT MADE IT WORTHWHILE TO GO BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD AND REVISIT WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED FIVE OR SIX YEARS LATER.
[01:20:01]
THIS IS THE ORIGINAL SITE PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED IN JULY OF 2015.AND I WANNA HIGHLIGHT A COUPLE OF THINGS.
NUMBER ONE, YOU'LL NOTICE IT'S A MORE TRADITIONAL LAYOUT IN THAT YOU HAVE BUILDINGS, PARKING BUILDINGS, PARKING BUILDINGS, PARKING.
THERE IS CONSIDERABLE GREEN SPACE, BUT NO SIZABLE GREEN SPACE.
WE'RE GONNA HAVE ONSITE AMENITIES, NO WALKING TRAILS.
SO BASICALLY WHAT WE DID IS JAKE AND THE RUSSOS AND ROB GET THE CREDIT FOR THIS, THEY WENT BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD AND TRIED TO BRING THIS UP TO WHAT WE WOULD SAY IS 2021 STANDARDS, THE EXACT SAME NUMBER OF UNITS, 144 UNITS, UM, COMPARED TO THE PREVIOUS PLAN.
YOU CAN SEE WE'VE NOW ADDED THIS REALLY SUBSTANTIAL INTERNAL GREEN SPACE WITH WALKING TRAILS.
WE'VE UPSCALED THE LOOK OF THE BUILDINGS.
SO WE'VE REALLY MADE SOME REAL SUBSTANTIAL IMPROVEMENTS COMPARED TO WHAT WE PRESENTED TO THE PLAYING BOARD ALL THE WAY BACK IN 2015.
UM, YOU CAN ALSO SEE IN TERMS OF THESE UNITS, THEIR TOWN HOME STYLE UNITS, THEY EACH HAVE THEIR OWN ATTACHED GARAGE.
SO INSTEAD OF HAVING LARGE SURFACE PARKING BLOCKS, WE'RE BRINGING THOSE GARAGE SPACES INTO THOSE BUILDINGS.
AND REALLY IT'LL CREATE A MUCH MORE FEELING OF A CHARACTER THAN WHAT I WOULD SAY WAS THAT MORE TRADITIONAL, ORIGINAL PROJECT.
I THINK THAT WOULD'VE BEEN A NICE PROJECT, BUT I THINK ANYONE THAT TAKES A CLOSE LOOK AT THE CURRENT PLAN AS WELL AS THE ELEVATIONS THAT JAKE AND HIS TEAM HAVE SPENT A LOT OF TIME ON, I THINK THIS IS A DRAMATIC STEP OR A DRAMATIC IMPROVEMENT COMPARED TO WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY PROPOSED.
WE DID PRESENT THIS PLAN TO YOU DURING THE MEETING ON OCTOBER 7TH OF LAST YEAR.
AT THAT POINT IN TIME, IT WAS STILL CONCEPTUAL BASED ON THE INPUT WE RECEIVED AT THAT MEETING.
WE DID GO AHEAD AND DO THE ENGINEERING.
ROB HAS SUBMITTED DOWNSTREAM SANITARY SEWER CAPACITY ANALYSIS.
AND I ALSO WANNA NOTE, BECAUSE THERE WAS A COMMENT ABOUT THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES FOR THE THREE BEDROOM UNITS.
AND IT BEING NOTED THAT MOST OF THOSE THREE BEDROOM UNITS, TYPICALLY THAT THIRD BEDROOM TYPICALLY, BUT NOT ALWAYS, IS UTILIZED FOR SOME TYPE OF OFFICE WORKSPACE, EXERCISE AREA, ET CETERA, ET CETERA.
BUT WE DID ADD, I BELIEVE, FOUR OR EIGHT VISITOR PARKING SPACES.
SO I THINK WE'RE COMFORTABLE NOW THAT WE HAVE ENOUGH PARKING.
IF ULTIMATELY HAD TO HAVE ADDITIONAL PARKING, WE COULD.
BUT KEEP IN MIND, IF WE COME AT THE EXPENSE OF GREEN SPACE, THERE'S PLENTY AREAS TO THAT.
WE ARE MORE THAN COMFORTABLE BASED ON OUR OWN INTERNAL ANALYSIS THAT WE HAVE ADEQUATE PARKING ON SITE.
SO ALL WE'D ASK YOU TO DO THIS EVENING IS CONSIDER TWO THINGS.
NUMBER ONE, SCHEDULE THE PUBLIC HEARING THAT'S REQUIRED, BECAUSE THIS IS AGAIN, A REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL.
AND THEN SECONDLY, UM, WE'D LIKE TO ASK YOU TO DIRECT OR TO CONSIDER RECOMMENDING THAT THE PLAN DEPARTMENT PREPARE DRAFT RESOLUTION FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION AT YOUR NEXT MEETING.
UH, THAT'S REALLY WHERE WE'RE AT IN NUTSHELL.
UH, WE HOPE YOU HAVE A FAVORABLE VIEW OF THE PROJECT AND WE DO WELCOME ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.
YOU EXPLAIN THE VARIANCE THAT YOU GOT.
SO THE VARIANCE, WE DID HAVE TO GO TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FOR A VARIANCE.
WE PRESENTED THIS TO THEM DURING A MEETING ON MARCH 2ND, I BELIEVE.
AND IT WAS FOR THE SETBACK BETWEEN TWO OF THE BUILDINGS OVER HERE.
THE ZONING CODE WOULD'VE REQUIRED 30 FEET, AND THE MEASUREMENT THERE IS APPROXIMATELY 14 AND A HALF FEET.
AND WE DID PRESENT THIS TO THE ZONING BOARD APPEALS.
WE ALSO SHOWED THEM THE OLD PLAN.
THEY AGREED THAT THIS PLAN WAS MUCH, MUCH BETTER.
AND THEY DID GRANT THAT ONE MINOR VARIANCE THAT WAS NEEDED FOR THIS ENTIRE PROJECT BY END OF THE SMOKE.
THANKS FOR REMINDING ME OF THAT, SARAH.
SO THE, THE LOTS ACROSS THE STREET, SINGLE FAMILY, HAVE THEY BEEN SOLD YET? I'M GONNA JOE, JEFF, WHAT'S THE STATUS CONTRACT? THEY'RE UNDER CONTRACT.
SO AS THEY'RE DEVELOPED THESE BUILDING HOMES, RIGHT.
SO, BUT SO PEOPLE ALREADY COMMITTED TO BUYING THOSE, THE THE HOMES THAT ARE BUILT ARE BACKED UP HERE.
THOSE THREE ARE, AND THOSE ARE NEXT PHASE THAT THEY'RE, IT'S UNDER CONSTRUCTION NOW.
THEY'RE, OKAY, SO THREE OF 'EM BUILT, THREE OF 'EM ARE UNDER CONSTRUCTION.
AND ORIGINALLY THIS WAS ACTUALLY ALL WERE DUE FOR PURPOSES OF SEEKER REZONING AS ONE OVERALL PROJECT.
SO IT WAS A SUBDIVISION AND THE MULTIFAMILY AS ONE OVERALL PROJECT.
SO THE PEOPLE THAT ARE BUYING THOSE HOMES KNOW THAT THIS TYPE OF PROJECT YES.
I ALSO FORWARDED THIS SITE PLAN TO NEIGHBORS THAT REQUESTED IT.
SO DO WE HAVE A COPY DREW OF THE SEEKER THAT WAS ORIGINALLY DONE IN THE SEEKER DECISION, BECAUSE WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO ATTEST THAT THIS IS IN ACCORDANCE THAT WE AGREED TO THAT SEEKER STILL STANDS.
I WILL SEND YOU A COPY OF THE DS AND THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION THAT WAS ISSUED BY THE TOWN BOARD OKAY.
[01:25:01]
BELIEVE, YEAH, IT WAS ISSUED FOR THE REZONING.AND THE, AND THE DATE OF THAT DECISION WAS UM, RIGHT, BECAUSE THIS WAS RA BEFORE THIS PROJECT.
I DON'T KNOW THE DATE, BUT RIGHT.
THERE'S A NEGATIVE DECLARATION.
IT WAS ISSUED BY THE WARD AS A LEAD AGENCY BECAUSE THE UNDERLYING ACCIDENT AT THAT TIME WAS A REASON.
I'LL GET YOU A COPY OF THAT NEXT DECK.
YOU WANNA SEE THE E TOO? I'LL SEE IF I CAN PULL THEM ON THE FILE.
IF YOU CAN PULL THEM, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
YOU'VE GOT SOME PICTURES OF THE ELEVATIONS AND THEY SAY FRONT AND BACK.
IF YOU ARE ON ONE OF THOSE SINGLE FAMILY HOME LOTS, ARE YOU LOOKING AT THE FRONT OR THE BACK? YOU'RE LOOKING EXCLUSIVELY ON ANY OF THESE LOTS THAT YOU'RE LABELED HERE.
47 TO 65, ACTUALLY YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE FRONT.
THE BACK OF EACH ONE OF THE UNITS, THE GREEN SPACE.
SO YOUR BACK PATIO WOULD BE OUT INTO THIS COURTYARD AREA WITH THE ONE MILE JOGGING TRACK AND ALL THE, THE BACKYARDS HERE WOULD FACE THE FRONT OF THE OTHER HOUSES.
WHICH IS ALSO ONE OF THE BENEFITS OF THE NEW LAYOUT.
WELL, AGAIN, I THINK IT WOULD'VE BEEN COMPATIBLE WITH THE RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION.
THIS REALLY BLENDS THOSE TWO USES TOGETHER, UH, NICELY.
AND MAKES IT MORE COMPELLED BECAUSE AGAIN, FRONT TO FRONT GREEN SPACE WALKING TRAIL, THESE, THE BACK OF THE FRONT ARE ALMOST, YEAH.
THE OTHER THING IS TYPICALLY WHEN YOU SEE MOST MULTI-FAMILY PROJECTS IN WATCH NEWARK AND EVEN ELSEWHERE, YOU KNOW, YOU SEE A SERIOUS STEP DOWN IN THE MATERIALS ALONG THE SIDES OF THE BACK.
YOU CAN SEE THERE'S REALLY BEEN ENOUGH TO REALLY TAKE WHAT WE ALREADY HAD APPROVED, GET APPROVED ON IT, ON ALL, ALL FACETS.
SO WHAT BILL WAS GETTING AT IS THAT THE, THESE, THESE NEW UNITS ARE NOW FACING ONTO CEDAR VALLEY WAY? THAT'S CORRECT.
IS THAT THE FRONT YARD? BECAUSE IT'S WEIRD BECAUSE YOU HAVE PARKING IN THE FRONT YARD KIND OF IN A LOT.
ARE WE GONNA TRY TO SCREEN THAT OR SOMETHING? BECAUSE YOU HAVE THOSE PARKING SPACES ALL ON THE WELL, I, I GUESS WHAT I WOULD SAY IS OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE A LANDSCAPING PLAN.
WE'RE GONNA HAVE LANDSCAPING, WE HAVE GREEN SPACE THERE.
THAT'S THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN THIS PROJECT AND THE PREVIOUS PROJECT.
WE DON'T HAVE A PARKING LOT, YOU KNOW, THAT FEELS LIKE INTERNAL DRIVEWAY FOR THOSE INDIVIDUAL UNITS.
YOU KNOW, YOU LOOK THROUGHOUT THIS WHOLE PLAN AND ESPECIALLY THAT SIDE THAT'S ADJACENT CEDAR VALLEY WAY, THERE REALLY IS NO PARKING.
WELL, BUT ARE YOU, ARE THESE PARKING SPACES HERE OR, I'M JUST LOOKING AT THE DRAW HERE.
THESE PARKING PARALLEL PARKING SPACES HERE.
THERE'S, THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT ARE A LITTLE CONCERNING, BUT THERE IS A SCREENING IN FRONT OF US.
OTHERWISE THE HEADLIGHTS ARE GONNA SHINE PRETTY ACROSS THE STREET.
SO WHERE ARE THE PARALLEL PARKING SPACES? YEAH, JUST TO POINT OUT.
SO, SO THIS IS CEDAR VALLEY WAY.
THESE ARE OF COURSE, SO ACCOUNTABLE STALL UNITS WITH THE ATTACHED GARAGES.
AND THERE ARE, UH, SEVERAL, THERE'S PERPENDICULAR SPACES THERE PRIMARILY FOR VISITORS OF COURSE.
WE DID SUBMIT A LANDSCAPING PLAN WITH MORE THAN ONE TO GRIEVANCE.
I, WE HAVE THE UPDATED LANDSCAPING PLAN.
I DUNNO, THAT I WASN'T FILES FOR TODAY.
YEAH, WE DID SUBMIT AN SO, WHICH I GUESS, WHICH DRAWING AM I LOOKING AT? SO I HAVE A SITE PLAN FROM SEPTEMBER 15TH.
AND THEN THERE IS, UH, SP DASH ONE PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN.
AND I THINK THAT'S JUST ONE SHEET.
THERE WAS A LANDSCAPE PLAN SUBMITTED WITH SCREENING
WHAT'S THE DATE ON THAT? UM, SUBMITTED IN MARCH OF, YEAH, SO THE LANDSCAPING PLAN WAS INCLUDED IN THE SET DATED, UM, 3 19 21, 3 19 21.
WHAT WE CAN DO, AND OBVIOUSLY IT'S PART OF A MUCH BIGGER SET, WHICH WOULD RESULT IN A GIGANTIC PD, WE CAN SEND A COPY OF THE LANDSCAPING PLAN SEPARATELY TO SARAH, IF THAT WOULD BE OKAY FOR, I THINK I ALREADY SUBMITTED.
I THINK I ALREADY SENT IT ALONG.
AND I, I DO WANNA POINT OUT THAT THESE, YOU KNOW, WE DO HAVE IN THIS, THIS PLAN SHOWS A LITTLE BETTER IN THAT WE DO HAVE THESE TREES STILL LINING THE STREET.
CAN YOU SEE THIS, KRISTEN, FROM YOUR VIEW? KATELYN? SORRY.
UM, CAN I SAY SOMETHING? UM, MARCH 24TH, I GOT AN EMAIL FROM TERRANCE BOYLE FROM YOUR OFFICE WITH A LINK TO THE DROPBOX CONTAINING ALL THE SHEETS FROM THE CEDAR VALLEY
[01:30:01]
SET.AND I FORWARDED THAT RIGHT ALONG TO YOU ON THAT SAME DAY.
YOU, US, THE LINK, THE DROPBOX, IT WAS A FULL SET OF THE PLAN.
I THOUGHT I WAS LOOKING AT THE RIGHT THING BECAUSE IT MATCHED YOUR POSTER BOARDS WHEN I WAS NOT, I MEAN, I LOVE THE FACT THAT THESE BUILDINGS ARE FACING ONTO THAT ROAD NOW THAT, THAT THEY'RE FACING THERE.
IT'S JUST A LITTLE UNUSUAL TO HAVE PARALLEL PARKING.
IMAGINE IT DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD IN A PARALLEL PARKING.
WE'RE GONNA HAVE SOME TREES THERE.
WE MAY WANNA DO SOMETHING A LITTLE BIT MORE.
I JUST CAN'T, I'M HAVING TROUBLE VISIONING THAT.
I THINK IT'S GONNA BE NICE THAT THE, THE BUILDINGS ARE FACING THE ROAD, BUT THEN YOU'RE GONNA HAVE THIS, YOU KNOW, SOME PARALLEL PARKING ALONG, YOU KNOW, RIGHT UP, RIGHT UP ALONG.
AM AM I THINKING OF IT WRONG, LIKE A REGULAR SUBURBAN NEIGHBORHOOD? SOMETIMES WHEN PEOPLE COME AND VISIT YOU, NOT IN THE WINTER WHEN YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED AND PEOPLE PARK ON THE STREET.
IS IT GONNA BE SIMILAR TO THAT BUT JUST FARTHER OFF THE ROAD? FARTHER OFF THE ROAD? RIGHT.
YEAH, IT'S EXACTLY WHAT IT IS.
THAT'S IT'S FOR, THERE'S NOT USUALLY THEY OVER STREET CAR.
IT'S JUST INTERESTING ALWAYS WHEN YOU HAVE THAT, IT'S KIND OF A DIFFERENT, DIFFERENT, THERE'S IN, IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD, THERE'S ACTUALLY A LOT OF PEOPLE THERE, PEOPLE PARKED ON THE STREET AND THEN HAVE GROUND.
THEY, WELL, THEY EVEN PAVED BETWEEN THE SIDEWALK AND THE ROAD TO KIND OF CREATE THEIR OWN PARALLEL SPOTS.
DIDN'T THAT PICTURE SHOW A CAR IN FRONT OF THE DRIVEWAY? SO YOU GOT A CAR IN THE DRIVEWAY? YEAH.
LIGHT IN THE DRIVEWAY SO THAT IT WOULD LY FIT VEHICLE.
AND THAT'S WHY THE PARALLEL IS, IS MORE FOR VISITORS.
SO FOR THE THIRD, EACH VEHICLE, AND AGAIN, THAT'S WHAT WAS, THAT'S WHAT WE WERE ASKED TO DO.
EACH UNIT, HIS TWO PARKING SPACES, ONE IN THE GARAGE, ONE OUTSIDE FOR EXCLUSIVE USE.
AND THEN I BELIEVE IN RESPONSE TO A COMMENT THAT CAME FROM THIS BOARD ADDED, 36 ADDITIONAL SURFACE SPACES WERE ADDED FOR VISITORS.
AND I THINK THE WAY WE'RE DOING IT IS PREFERABLE TO TAKING EDGES OF THE SITE, ESPECIALLY BASED TO THE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD, JUST PUTTING LARGER AREAS OF PAYMENTS.
AND YOU ALSO HAVE A PARKING AREA FOR THE COMMUNITIES? WE DO ALSO SOMEONE A PARTY.
LIKE FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOU'RE HAVING A FAMILY BIRTHDAY PARTY, SOMEONE, YOU KNOW, 70TH BIRTHDAY, GENERALLY SPEAKING, THESE TYPES OF COMMUNITIES, YOU'RE GONNA USE A CLUBHOUSE.
YOU'RE, IT'S AVAILABLE FOR THAT PURPOSE.
ONE OF THE BENEFITS OF LIVING, JUST TO ADD A LITTLE BIT MORE CLARITY, THE REASON, YOU KNOW, WE, WE LOOKED AT THE ORIGINAL PLAN, WHICH YOU'VE SEEN AND WE WENT BACK AND, YOU KNOW, I CONSULTED WITH JAKE AND WE ASKED, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S GOING ON IN OTHER AREAS OF THE COUNTRY WITH PROGRESSIVE, UH, YOU KNOW, RESIDENTIAL RENTAL UNITS.
AND THIS IS KIND OF WHAT WE'RE SEEING IN OTHER PARTS OF THE COUNTRY WHERE IT'S MORE OF A LIFESTYLE COMMUNITY.
SO WE DREW IN THIS ONE MILE JOGGING TRACK.
WE'RE GONNA HAVE A, UM, AN AREA OVER HERE FOR, UH, A FENCE AND DOG WALKING THE AREA.
THERE'S A FITNESS CENTER IN THE COMMUNITY AREA.
THERE'S GONNA BE AN, UM, AN, AN OPEN ROOM IN THE CLUBHOUSE AND THE COMMUNITY ROOM TO HAVE, UH, ANY ENTERTAINMENT.
ALSO, THERE'S GONNA BE OUTDOOR KITCHEN OUT HERE AND THERE'S ALL THESE CROSSWALK TO KIND OF INTEGRATE THE UNITS TOGETHER AND MAKE IT EASIER TO VISIT AND BACK AND FORTH AND KEEP EVERYTHING KIND OF ON THIS SIDE OF THE ROAD.
AND THEN IT OBVIOUSLY WELCOMES THE REST OF THE RESIDENTS FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO COME UTILIZE THE FACILITY.
AND FOR EACH AND EVERY UNIT, IT'S A GOOD POINT.
YOU HAVE DIRECT ACCESS TO THAT RECREATIONAL DRILL, WHICH THAT'S A COOL FEATURE.
OFTENTIMES THOSE ENTER ON ONE SIDE OF A MULTIFAMILY SITE AND GO AROUND A LAKE OR A POND, BUT YOU HAVE TO GET THERE AND USE IT.
SO THERE'S OUTDOOR ACTIVITY, THERE'S WALKABILITY, THERE'S, UH, UM, A LOT OF CROSS SECTIONS TO, TO INTEGRATE WITH YOUR NEIGHBORS.
SO I THINK WE, WE WERE ASKED FOR TWO THINGS.
NUMBER ONE WAS TO SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING.
UH, THE SECOND ONE, THE PLANNING BOARD WANTED ME TO SPEND THE, FIND THE ORIGINAL SERVICE TO HELP ME FIND THE ORIGINAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF MATERIALS BECAUSE OUR DECISION IS, YOU KNOW, IS IT STILL IN PERFORMANCE WITH THAT DECK? THERE'S NO PROBLEMS, THERE'S NO OTHER ISSUES CREATED BY THIS.
SO, BUT WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE WE'RE CLEAR HERE.
WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR A NEW SECRET DETERMINATION.
WELL, THE DETERMINATION IS THAT OUR DECISION, DECISION SOMETHING IN THE TOWN BOARD? YEAH, NO, THAT'S FINE.
I JUST WANTED MAKE SURE, YOU KNOW, DID THEY PUT SOME SOMETHING IN THE NECK DECK OR WHATEVER? I DON'T
[01:35:01]
REMEMBER.ALRIGHT, SO IT'S PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD.
IS THERE AN EXTERIOR LIGHTING PLAN ON ONE OF THESE SHEETS? YES, THERE'S A LIGHTING PLAN.
WHAT SHEET NUMBER WOULD THAT BE? I DON'T THAT, I DUNNO.
THERE IS, WE DON'T KNOW THE SHEET NUMBER.
WE HAVE DEVELOPED A, A LIGHTING PLAN AND, UH, PHOTOMETRIC PLAN.
I THOUGHT THAT WAS WITH THIS PACKAGE.
AND THE MOST IMPORTANT PARTS ARE DARK SKY COMPLIANT.
GO FOR THE REASON WHY I DON'T HAVE IT IS BECAUSE, UH, IT'S, IT'S IN THE BIG YEAH, MAKES SENSE.
I HAVE NOWHERE TO KEEP THAT TAMMY HAS THAT.
IF YOU COULD JUST SEND THE NOTE TO SARAH WITH WHAT SHEET NUMBER THAT IS SO I CAN PULL IT UP.
LATER THAT BOX, I'M ASSUMING IN THE DRAWER.
BILL, YOU WERE SAYING ANYTHING ELSE? YOU WERE GONNA SET IT PUBLIC, RIGHT? I WAS GONNA, ANYTHING ELSE FROM OR THE APPLICANTS AND WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO CONSIDER TO ASK FOR PREPARATION OF A DRAFT RESOLUTION WITH IT BEING UNDERSTOOD? WE KNOW YOU DON'T HAVE TO VOTE TONIGHT HEARING, BUT, SO YOU POTENTIALLY COULD WHERE WE'RE, AGAIN, IT'S NOT YOUR PROBLEM.
WE'VE BEEN AT THIS A LONG TIME AND WE'RE VERY ANXIOUS TO GET STARTED.
SO, UM, WE'LL, WE'LL TAKE THIS PIECE BY PIECE.
UH, SO PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE 21ST, IS EVERYBODY OKAY WITH THAT? YES.
UM, SECOND PART IS THE DRAFT RESOLUTIONS.
ARE WE COMFORTABLE WITH THAT? NO, I WOULD LIKE TO PUBLIC HEARING FIRST.
SO, AND PLUS WE'VE GOTTA, WE'VE GOTTA LOOK AT THE SECRET BEFORE WE FIGURE OUT IF WE CAN USE THAT ORIGINAL, SEE.
SO I GUESS WE'LL JUST, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING ON APRIL 21ST.
SO WE'LL SEE YOU BACK HERE ON THE 21ST FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING.
NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS APOLLO CONCRETE COATINGS REQUESTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL OF A 6,791 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE SLASH WAREHOUSE BUILDING ON VACANT LAND LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF RILEY BOULEVARD, NORTH OF SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD.
WE'RE HERE TO PROPOSE A 6,000, UH, 791 PLUS OR MINUS SQUARE FOOT OFF WAREHOUSE BUILDING FOR
THEY DO YOUR GARAGE FLOORS AND FIX 'EM UP.
UM, SO IT'S GONNA BE ABOUT A 1300 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE, WOOD TRADE OFFICE STRUCTURE, AND THEN A PRE-ENGINEERED METAL BUILDING FOR THE, UH, REST OF THE PROJECT.
UM, THE SITE'S ONLY AT 0.79 ACRES.
SO UNDER THE REQUIREMENT FOR STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION, I THINK THE ENGINEERING COMMENTS WHERE WE HAVE TO TAKE CARE OF OUR OWN RUNOFF, UH, WHICH IS NOT A PROBLEM.
WE HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THAT EVEN THOUGH WE ARE DEALING WITH SOME OF THE RUNOFF COMING FROM BANK CREDIT UNION.
UM, AS FOR A LIGHTING PLAN, WE HAVEN'T PROVIDED ONE, BUT IT'LL JUST BE THE PACKS DIRECTED DOWN.
THERE ARE HOURS OF OPERATION, SEVEN IN THE MORNING TILL FIVE AT NIGHT.
NOTHING, NOTHING IN THE PARKING LOT? NO, NO, NO.
UM, LANDSCAPING PROVIDED A PLAN, I DON'T THINK SEEN IF YOU IT NO, YOU EMAIL IT TO ME THAT THEY HAVE.
OTHERWISE, UM, I, IF YOU SEEN ANY ELEVATIONS OF THE BUILDINGS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS? LOOK FOR PUBLIC HEARING ALL.
SO YOU WANT US TO SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING? THAT'S WHAT YOU SAID? YES.
[01:40:01]
QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS PROJECT EITHER IN FRONT OF US? UH, THREE WEEKS AGO? OH, THEY DID GET A VARIANCE LAST.YES, WE GOT A VARI FOR SOME OF THE PARKING.
YOU LOOK AT THE AREA HERE THAT ARE PURPLE.
THOSE TWO WERE IN WITHIN THE, UM, MEMO SETBACK OR FOR THE, UH, PARKING 35.
SO THAT WAS FRIDAY LAST NIGHT.
UH, DREW, THIS IS ONE THAT WAS IN THE BUSINESS PARK.
YOU HAVE A COPY OF THE 11 PAGE FINDING STATEMENT WHEN THE TOWN BOARD REZONED THIS AND BASICALLY CREATED THIS BUSINESS PART, THEY DID A-G-E-I-S AND ISSUED FINDINGS.
YOU NEED TO REVIEW THAT 11 PAGE FINDINGS AND MAKE SURE THAT THAT A A YOU CAN ISSUE SUPPLEMENTAL BINDINGS.
YOU CAN, YOU CAN SAY IT'S IN PERFORMANCE, BUT PLEASE REVIEW THAT FINDING STATEMENT.
YOU HAVE IT NOW, YOU JUST HAD IT FOR THE LAST, UH, FOUR OR FIVE DAYS.
NOW YOU NEED TO REVIEW THAT AND THEN WE'LL TAKE PUBLIC COMMENT AND THEN WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO DECIDE ON WHAT YOU WANNA DO FROM A SECRET STANDPOINT.
SO ONE OF MY QUESTIONS FOR YOU, DREW, I I HAD LOOKED AT THIS EARLIER, BUT ONE OF MY QUESTIONS IS THAT WE, THE, THE SEEKER THAT WE HAVE FOR THE BUSINESS PARK FINDING HAS SOME FULL BUILD OUT IN TERMS OF BUILDING SPACE AND I, UH, DON'T KNOW IF I SAW IT, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF IT ALSO INCLUDES LIKE A FULL PAVEMENT SPACE FOR THE FULL BUILD.
I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, IS DO WE HAVE AN UPDATE FOR THE FULL AREA? THERE'S NOT A MAP WITH THIS FOR THE BUILDING PARK.
AND BASED ON THAT, DO WE HAVE, UH, WHAT PERCENTAGE OF THAT IN BUILD OUT WE'RE AT AND HOW MUCH IS LESS? I GUESS JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE KEEPING, I I BELIEVE THE TWO PROJECTS ON YOUR AGENDA TONIGHT ARE THE FIRST TWO PROJECTS THAT ARE IN THAT PART.
THE ACTUAL, UM, EXISTING WHAT'S, I'M SORRY, WHAT'S THE EXISTING BUSINESS CREDIT UNION? CORRECT.
WE'RE PART OF THE CONSIDERATION.
SO WHAT I WILL GET YOU FROM THE D-G-E-I-S-A COPY OF THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN FOR THE BUILD OUT OF THE SITE.
SO YOU'LL SEE THAT CONCEPTUAL PLAN, BUT THEY'RE NOWHERE NEAR THIS BECAUSE THESE ARE THE FIRST TWO PROJECTS TONIGHT THAT ARE WITHIN THAT BUSINESS PART.
WHEN WAS THAT BUSINESS PARK APPROVED? 2005.
IT LOOKS LIKE IT GOT SIGNED BY STEVE WALTERS IN 2006.
UH, THAT'S, THAT'S A VERY IMPORTANT DOCUMENT BECAUSE IT WENT THROUGH REZONING, IT WAS CONTROVERSIAL AT THE TIME.
THERE WERE A LOT OF PUBLIC INPUT TO IT AND THE TOWN BOARD MADE SOME, SOME DECISIONS IN IMPROVING THAT BUSINESS PART.
I THINK THAT, I THINK THAT'S MY BIG QUESTION TO YOU, DREW, IS IF YOU CAN, IF IN THAT GEIS, IF THERE'S ANY UH, UH, CLARITY ON WHAT'S OVERALL PROPOSED, UH, PREVIOUS SPACE, SO EITHER PAVE OR BUILDING EXISTS, THERE'S NUMBERS ABOUT BUILDINGS IN HERE AND THEN THERE'S OVERALL BUILD OUT.
BUT I GUESS IT'S UNCLEAR TO ME WHAT IS SO WHAT NUMBER WE SHOULD BE USING AN EVENT PARKING LOT SPACE, RIGHT? YOU HAVE TO GIVE US SOME TIME.
SARAH HAS FOUND THE FILE, PULLED THE FILE OUT, BUT OBVIOUSLY YOU COULD PROBABLY IMAGINE IT'S ALL PAPER COPIES.
THERE'S NO ONE CAN FIND ELECTRONIC COPIES FROM 15, 16 YEARS AGO.
SO ALL WE HAVE IS PAPER COPIES.
WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO TRY TO COPY SOME OF THE SECTIONS OF THE DGIS AND PROBABLY FROM FIVE, WHAT'S THAT
I MEAN, I THINK THIS IS PRETTY BROAD AND HIGH LEVEL.
OTHER THAN THAT, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT MULTIPLE DEVELOPMENTS THAT AS WE LOOK AT THEM, THAT WE'RE STILL ACTING THAT PROPOSAL NUMBERS.
WE SHOULD KEEP, ONCE WE START APPROVING, SO OF THIS PART, WE NEED TO KEEP LIKE WE DID IN ORDER TO KEEP A RUNNING TAB OF WHAT'S BEING PUT IN.
SO, UH, ONE OTHER QUESTION, DREW, CAN WE, WHEN WE ISSUE OUR, WHATEVER OUR DETERMINATION IS ON THE PRO THIS PROJECT, CAN WE ADD LIKE A ONE PAGE TO ADD TO THE FINDINGS THAT BASICALLY SAYS OUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE G-I-S-G-E-I-S AUTHORIZED THIS, THIS, AND THIS, THE ADDITION OF THIS PROJECT AND OR THE OTHER PROJECT WOULD AFFECT WOULD, IT WOULD GO AGAINST X PERCENTAGE OF WHAT WAS IDENTIFIED PREVIOUSLY.
AND WHAT I'LL DO IS IF I COULD FIND THE ELECTRONIC FILE, WHICH I'M GONNA TRY TO DO LIKE WE'VE DONE WITH THE OTHER BUSINESS PARTS, IS THAT WE'LL
[01:45:01]
PUT A FINDINGS FORM TOGETHER WHERE YOU CAN THEN DOCUMENT AND THEN KEEP TRACK OF WHAT'S PREVIOUSLY APPROVED.SO WE'LL TRY TO DO THAT LIKE WE DID FOR RAVENWOOD NORTH ANOTHER BUSINESS PARK.
BUT THIS IS, AS YOU'RE FINDING OUT, IT'S THE FIRST PARK, FIRST DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THAT APPROVED PARK FROM 2006, 2005, 2006.
WELL I'M, I'M GONNA HAVE TO TAKE THIS DOCUMENT AND CONVERT IT INTO A WORD DOCUMENTED INTEGRATED FORMAT BECAUSE I'M NOT GONNA FIND THE ELECTRONIC FILES.
BUT THAT, THAT ADDING ADDITIONAL PAGE, RIGHT.
ADDITIONAL PAGE THAT WE CAN KEEP RUNNING TRACK BECAUSE LIKE I SAID, THERE'S THIS PART WILL EVENTUALLY BE BILLED OUT.
AT THIS RATE 200 YEARS FROM NOW
SO, UM, THE ONE QUESTION WE HAD ON OUR MEMO, I COULDN'T DO THE, I THINK I ASKED LAST TIME, IF YOU COULD DO THE CALCULATION, THERE IS A LOCK COVERAGE REQUIREMENT.
DO YOU KNOW THE LOCK COVERAGE INCLUDING BUILDING AND GRADE THEREIN ON THE ONE? IS IT ON THE ONE? YEAH, 24.93 IS THE PERCENT OF THE GREEN.
WE DIDN'T SEE ON THE SITE PLAN ON THE ANYTHING ELSE THAT WE THINK WE NEED BEFORE SCHEDULING A PUBLIC HEARING.
I, I ASKED YOU LAST TIME ABOUT THE RESTORATIVE STUFF.
THERE'S NO FUELS OR IT'S BEING STORED IN A WAY IT'S NOTABLE.
NOPE, THERE'S NOTHING AND WE DON'T USE ANYTHING ON SITE.
WE TAKE IT ALL TO THE CUSTOMER'S HOUSES AND THAT'S WHAT WE USE IT.
IT DOESN'T STAY, IT'S NOT GONNA STAY IN STORAGE.
I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING ON APOLLO CONCRETE FOR APRIL 21ST.
SECOND, A MOTION BY MR. CLARK, SECOND BY MR. MAHONEY.
SO WE'LL SEE YOU IN TWO WEEKS FOR A PUBLIC HEARING.
NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS JSEK HAMBURG, LLC, REQUESTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT AND SITE PLAN APPROVAL OF A NEW CAR WASH FACILITY TO BE LOCATED ON VACANT LAND NORTHEAST OF 4 4 8 4 SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD.
AND AS DREW POINTED OUT, THIS IS THE SECOND DEVELOPMENT IN THIS PROPOSED CAR.
AND UH, THE FINDINGS THAT WERE SAID TO US UNDER MITIGATIVE MEASURES PAGE SIX OF 11 SPECIFICALLY PROHIBIT COMMERCIAL CAR.
IS THAT HOW EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS THAT? I CAN CHIME IN.
SO SEAN HOPKINS ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT.
JSEK HAMBURG, LLC, UH, ALSO WITH ME IS CHRIS WOOD, THE PROJECT ENGINEER FROM CARINO WOOD MORRIS.
SINCE THE PUBLIC HEARING THAT WAS HELD BY THIS BOARD A COUPLE WEEKS AGO, ONE OF THE COMMENTS THAT WAS MADE AT THAT MEETING WAS DREW INDICATED WE NEED TO LOOK BACK AT THE FINDING STATEMENT THAT HAD BEEN ISSUED IN CONNECTION WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PURSUANT TO SEEKER FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT.
UH, SARAH WAS KIND ENOUGH TO FORWARD A COPY OF THAT TO US AND BASICALLY THERE'S SEVERAL IMPORTANT POINTS.
NUMBER ONE, AT THAT POINT IN TIME, THE OVERALL SITE, WHICH WAS 28 ACRES, YOU KNOW, WHERE GENERALLY IT IS, IT WAS ENVISIONED THAT THIS IS GOING BACK IN 2005 AND EARLY 2006, THAT IT WOULD BE A 211,500 SQUARE FOOT HAMBURG BUSINESS PARK, PRIMARILY IN OFFICE PARK.
I TALKED TO DAVID BURS ABOUT THE ORIGINAL APPROVAL TODAY.
BASICALLY WHAT OCCURRED WHEN THERE WAS BASICALLY THE NATIONAL MELTDOWN IN THE ECONOMY 2008, SINCE THAT POINT IN TIME, THEY'VE HAD NOT ONE PROSPECTIVE USER APPROACH HIM ABOUT OFFICE.
AND I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY COMMON EVERYWHERE IN WESTERN NEW YORK AND PROBABLY THROUGHOUT THE UNITED STATES, ESPECIALLY IN LIGHT OF COVID-19.
BUT WHEN IT WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED AT THAT POINT IN TIME, AT LEAST THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW, UNDER MITIGATION MEASURES, IT DID EXCLUDE CERTAIN OTHERWISE PERMITTED C TWO USES.
THOSE INCLUDED BOAT MARINE SALE SERVICES, WAREHOUSES, DAIRIES, WHOLESALE SALES AND DISTRIBUTION, COMMERCIAL SWIMMING POOLS, THEATERS AND DRIVE-INS, GOLF DRIVING RANGES, ADMINISTER GOLF, NEW AND USED MOTOR VEHICLE SALES TRUCK TERMINALS, LAUNDRY AND DRY CLEANING PLANTS, STORAGE AND SALES OF SOLID FUEL, COMMERCIAL CAR WASHES, FILLING STATIONS, GASOLINE STATIONS, AUTOMOTIVE
[01:50:01]
REPAIR SHOPS, AND PUBLIC GARAGES.OBVIOUSLY A LOT OF TIME HAS PASSED, THIS IS NOW 15 YEARS LATER.
THE SITE ULTIMATELY WILL NOT BE DEVELOPED AS THE ORIGINALLY PROPOSED AT THAT TIME.
I ALSO WANNA NOTE WITHIN THE ACTUAL TEXT OF THE FINDING STATEMENT, IF YOU LOOK AT PAGE 10, THERE WAS SOME FORETHOUGHT GIVEN AT THAT POINT IN TIME AND THAT BASICALLY THERE IS A STATEMENT THAT SAYS IN THE GIS, THE HAMMERED BUSINESS PARK IS DEFINED AS A CONSTRUCTION OF 211,500 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL RETAIL AND SERVICE BUSINESSES.
CERTAIN USES GENERALLY ALLOWED UNDER C TWO ZONING ARE BEING PROHIBITED IN THIS LOCATION AS PART OF THE RESERVE.
HOWEVER, THE RANGE OF POTENTIAL USES REMAINS FLEXIBLE.
IF SITE PLAN APPLICATIONS ARE SUBMITTED FOR PROJECTS THAT DIFFER SIGNIFICANTLY IN USE OR SIZE OR SCALE FROM THE USES AND SCALE DESCRIBED IN EVALUATING THE GIS OR IF THE PROPERTY IS SUBDIVIDED IN A CONFIGURATION OTHER THAN SHOWN IN FIGURE THREE OF THE DIS, WHICH WE ARE DOING ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OR SUPPLEMENTAL EIS MAY BE REQUIRED.
SO MY OPINION ON HOW THIS NEEDS TO BE HANDLED, AND AGAIN, ULTIMATELY IT WOULD BE IN THE DISCRETION OF THE BOARD.
WE BELIEVE THAT WHAT WOULD HAVE TO OCCUR, DREW OR SARAH JENNIFER, WELCOME YOUR INPUT.
WE BELIEVE ULTIMATELY YOU WOULD HAVE TO DO ONE OF TWO THINGS.
YOU WOULD'VE TO ISSUE A SUPPLEMENTAL FINDING STATEMENT, WHICH YOU DO BECAUSE IT WAS A GENERIC, YOU WOULD NOW BE AN INVOLVED IN POTENTIALLY THE LEAD AGENCY OR SECONDLY, I BELIEVE YOU CAN ACTUALLY ISSUE A NEGATIVE DECLARATION IF IT'S ADEQUATELY DESCRIBED WHY YOU'RE SAYING THAT A CARWASH NOW COULD BE PERMITTED.
KEEPING IN MIND THAT'S THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW.
WE ALSO DO NEED THE UNDERLINE APPROVALS, WHICH HAVE BEEN THE SUBJECT OF THE HEARING, THE SITE PLAN APPROVAL, THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT.
AND I DO WANNA KNOW, WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THERE'S A PUBLIC HEARING HELD ON THE REQUEST REMINDER SUBDIVISION APPROVAL.
THIS PARKS IS COMPLETELY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WAS ENVISIONED IN 2005 IN 2006.
SO WE THINK A LOT HAS CHANGED.
WE DO HAVE TO DEAL WITH THAT FINDING STATEMENT THAT WAS ISSUED 15 YEARS AGO.
AGAIN, I WELCOME INPUT FROM DREW AND SARAH, BUT I THINK THERE IS A SOLUTION AT THE END, OBVIOUSLY SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL THIS MORNING.
DREW, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT IT, SARAH, THAT IS ACCURATE.
YOU, YOU, YOU, YOU HAVE THOSE CHOICES WHEN A GENERIC IMPACT STATEMENT BEEN DONE, THE INVOLVED AGENCIES CAN MAKE DECISIONS.
THEY CAN SAY IT'S TOTALLY IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE FINDINGS, WHICH OBVIOUSLY IT'S NOT, THEY CAN SAY THAT THE CHANGE FROM THE FINDINGS IS INSIGNIFICANT, AN ISSUE, A NECK DECK OR THEY COULD DO A SUPPLEMENTAL FINDINGS OR THEY COULD ASK FOR A SUPPLEMENTAL FINDING.
SO THOSE ARE YOUR CHOICES YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO REVIEW.
I THINK IT GOES TO THE POINT, UH, I THINK, UH, WHO BROUGHT UP THE LAST MEETING, I THINK THAT IF YOU READ THE DGIS, I THINK THEY WERE TRYING TO LIMIT THOSE USES BECAUSE OF COMMUNITY CHARACTER AND TRYING TO ESTABLISH COMMUNITY CHARACTER IN THAT AREA.
SO, UM, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO TAKE A LOOK AT AND DECIDE HOW YOU WANT TO HANDLE THIS.
IT IS UNDER THE CURRENT FINDINGS, NOT ALLOWED USE, BUT YOU HAVE THE POWERS AND INVOLVED AGENCY TO MAKE ONE OF THOSE FOUR DECISIONS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT.
SO THAT'S, YOU'RE GONNA ASK FOR INFORMATION.
I KNOW YOU'VE ALREADY ASKED FOR, YOU'RE GONNA NEED COPIES OF DBIS OR SECTIONS OF IT FGIS.
YOU'RE HAVE TO CONSIDER HOW YOU WANNA MOVE ON THIS.
READ WHAT THE THOUGHT OF THE TOWN BOARD WAS IN MAKING THIS REZONING AND GEIS DECISION.
AND THEN IN TERMS OF THE UNDERLYING OTHER ASPECTS OF THE PROJECT, WE'VE DISCUSSED REZONING.
WELL IT REZONING BACK, BACK THEN IT WAS RIGHT THEN WE REZONED TO C TWO.
WITH AN ENVISION IT WOULD BE AN OFFICE.
WHICH AGAIN, RESTRICTIONS ON THE C, RIGHT? RIGHT.
YEAH, WE, WE DEFINITELY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT LANGUAGE.
THE OTHER, THE OTHER ASPECTS I WANT TO POINT OUT AND REITERATE FROM PREVIOUS MEETINGS IS NUMBER ONE, WE DID SUBMIT A TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY AS A RECALL IN CONNECTION WITH THE PREVIOUS PROJECT.
FURTHER DOWN SOUTHWESTERN, THE BIGGEST TRAFFIC RELATED CONCERN THE BOARD HAS WAS THAT WE COULDN'T CONTROL ACCESS ON THE SOUTHWESTERN, THANKFULLY.
AND IT WAS ACTUALLY AS A RESULT OF THIS ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW 15 YEARS AGO, THE WRITE OUT ONTO SOUTHWESTERN AT THIS LOCATION IS WRITE OUT ONLY ACTUALLY WAS PART OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW.
AND THEN SECONDLY, WE ALSO ARE PROVIDING THAT CONNECTION TO RALEIGH BOULEVARD ALONG THE SHARED PROPERTY LINE WITH THE TRACKER SUPPLY.
I ALSO WANT TO NOTE, WE DID SUBMIT FULLY ENGINEERED PLANS.
UM, ANTHONY ALPE FROM CHRIS'S OFFICE, I BELIEVE HAS REACHED OUT AND SPOKE TO TAMMY.
I THINK WE'RE ALL SET IN TERMS OF A TECHNICAL REVIEW.
I DON'T THINK WE'VE PROBABLY GOT AN UPDATED MEMO YET, BUT I THINK WE'RE ALL GOOD THERE.
WE ALSO HAVE COORDINATED WITH THE ERIE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS.
THEY WILL BE PROVIDING A LETTER CONFIRMING THEIR DECISION.
AND I HAVE PROVIDED A COPY OF THE TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY TO EDWARD RUSKI, NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION.
HE OBVIOUSLY IN CONNECTION WITH THE PREVIOUS
[01:55:01]
PROJECT, ADDITIONAL LETTER SAYING HE DID NOT BELIEVE IT HAD A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ON SOUTHWESTERN.I EXPLAINED THE CHANGE IN CIRCUMSTANCES, THE DIFFERENCES IN THE SITE, SENT HIM THE SITE PLAN AND WHILE I DON'T THINK WE RECEIVED ANYTHING IN WRITING, UH, HE GENERALLY HAD FAVORABLE REVIEWS.
HE SAID, I DO AGREE THAT'S A BETTER SITE.
AND HOPEFULLY THAT ADDRESSES THE CONCERN THE CLAIM BOARD PREVIOUSLY HAD ABOUT ACCESS ON THE SOUTHWESTERN.
SO WE DO THINK THIS IS A GOOD PROJECT.
WE RECOGNIZE THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF A BUMP IN THE ROAD IN LIGHT OF THE FINDING STATEMENT ISSUE 15 YEARS AGO.
BUT WE WOULD HOPE AND LIKE SOME UNDERLYING MERIT OF THE PROJECT, UH, THAT WE'D BE ABLE TO MOVE THIS FORWARD AND RECEIVE THE UNDERLYING REQUESTED APPROVALS, WHICH AGAIN ARE SITE PLAN APPROVAL, SPECIAL USE PERMIT BECAUSE IT IS A COMMERCIAL CAR WASH.
AND THEN FINALLY, AND I DON'T THINK YOU'VE HAD THE HEARING ON THIS YET, MINOR SUBDIVISION APPROVAL.
SO I GUESS ONE OF MY QUESTIONS FOR DREW IS HE'S PULLING OUT THE PORTION OF THE EIS IS WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S ANYTHING WRITTEN IN THE ALTERNATIVES OR IN, UH, IN THE PROPOSAL THAT DOCUMENTS WHY TIMING EXCLUDED A CAR WASH FROM THE POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT THERE.
I GUESS I WOULD, I WE'VE HAD A LOT OF INFORMATION.
WE OBVIOUSLY HAVE BEEN SOMEWHAT INTERESTED IN THIS AS, AS IT'S PROPOSED, IT'S COME A LONG WAY.
BUT I GUESS THE QUESTION FOR ME IS WHY WAS IT EXCLUDED IN THE FIRST PLACE AND IS THERE ANY EXPLANATION AS TO WHY, UM,
UH, SARAH'S TAKEN A LOOK AT IT.
UM, I THINK, YEAH, I WANNA READ FROM THE DOCUMENT.
NO, I WANNA MAKE, BECAUSE IT'S, IT'S AN EXCELLENT QUESTION AND THERE IS ACTUALLY AN ANSWER.
IT'S ACTUALLY RIGHT IN THE TEXT OF THE DOCUMENT.
THAT'S WHAT WAS OFFERED BY THE APPLICANT AT THE TIME.
THE APPLICANT OFFERED THOSE RESTRICTIONS IN RECOGNITION OF THE FACT IT WAS AN OFFICE CLERK.
SO IT WASN'T, I DON'T THINK IT CAME UP WITH THOSE.
I THINK PROBABLY SOMEONE AT THE TOWN LEVEL ASKED THEM TO LOOK AT C TWO AND SAY, WELL WHICH USE WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO RESTRICT? AND THIS WAS THEIR PROPOSAL.
HE SAID, I DON'T REMEMBER SPECIFICALLY WHAT WE AGREED TO, BUT WE AGREED, AGREED TO DO SOMETHING.
HE SAID, I APOLOGIZE, I DIDN'T REMEMBER THAT COMMERCIAL CAR WASHES WAS INCLUDED IN THAT LIST BACK IN 2005, 2006.
SO IT WAS, AND I THINK IT WAS IMPORTANT IT WAS OFFERED BY THE APPLICANT THEMSELVES.
WELL, I'LL HAVE TO CHECK BECAUSE TYPICALLY WHEN THAT HAPPENS, WHEN SOMEONE OFFERS RESTRICTIONS ON THEIR PROPERTY, IT HELPS IN THE YEAH.
IN THE, IN THE SEEKER ANALYSIS TO SAY, WELL THESE USES WILL NOT OCCUR.
SO THESE IMPACTS WILL NOT HAVE TO BE EVALUATED.
SO THAT'S WHAT I WOULD LOOK INTO, SEE IF THERE'S SOMETHING IN THERE THAT SAYS, OH, BY HIM OFFERING THESE RESTRICTIONS, IT REDUCED THIS IMPACT OR MADE IT INSIGNIFICANT BY NOT HAVING TO EVALUATE A USE THAT COULD CREATE A PROBLEM.
I MEAN A LOT OF TIMES THAT DEFENSE WILL DO THAT BECAUSE THEY KNOW A CERTAIN USE MAY CREATE A PROBLEM THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD RESULT IN A, THAT YOU KNOW, A NEGATIVE FINDINGS.
BUT OKAY, THEN I'M GONNA HAVE TO GO THROUGH AND WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO MAKE COPIES OF THOSE SECTIONS THAT YOU GUYS CAN LOOK AT.
I MEAN YOU'RE HAVE TO MAKE ONE OF THOSE FOUR DECISIONS.
SO YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO DOCUMENT WHY YOU'RE MAKING THAT DECISION ON THE RECORD.
WELL I'M GONNA HAVE TO GO LOOK THROUGH THE DGIS AND FGI IS AND LOOK FOR IF THERE'S ANY REFERENCE IN THERE ABOUT THESE RESTRICTIONS AND, AND WAS IT USED IN THE SECRET DECISION ABOUT DID IT REDUCE IMPACTS IN CERTAIN LEVELS? WHAT'S THAT? YOU DIDN'T ALREADY SEND THEM? I DID NOT.
BUT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR THE REASONING BEHIND THE FINDINGS.
USUALLY THE FINDINGS ARE SUPPORTED BY FACTS ON THE RECORD.
THE DGIS IS THE APPLICANT'S EXPLANATION OF THE PROJECT.
WHY THE FGIS ANSWER SUBSTANTIVE AND THEN SETS THE FRAMEWORK FOR THE FINDING.
SO YOU WANT TO SEE HOW THAT, WHY THAT FINDING WAS SET THAT WAY AND IS THERE SOMETHING WE NEED TO ANALYZE BECAUSE OF ADDING A USE THAT WAS SPECIFICALLY EXCLUDED, RIGHT.
THE TEXT OF THE FINDING STATEMENT ITSELF, THAT'S ONLY REFERENCE TO COMMERCIAL CAR WASH WAS UNDER COMMUNITY CHARACTER.
I DID, I DID READ THE WHOLE DOCUMENT.
THERE WAS NO OTHER
I THINK WHAT WE'RE GONNA FIND IS IT WAS SIMPLY THEY WERE OFFERED TO, THEY WERE, THE APPLICANT WAS ASKED TO OFFER TO RESTRICT USE AND THAT'S WHAT THEY PROPOSED.
AND DO YOU THINK THAT'S BECAUSE HE ASSUMED THAT THEY WOULD ALL BE OFFICE BUILDING? YEAH, GENERALLY SPEAKING AND YOU WOULDN'T WANT A CAR WASH IN THE MIDDLE OF AN OFFICE PARK.
I'M NOT SAYING IT COULD NEVER BE COMPATIBLE, BUT IT'S PROBABLY NOT THE WORD.
BUT MOST OF THE OTHER USES, I THINK YOU CAN STILL AGREE.
YOU PROBABLY WOULDN'T WANT TO SEE THAT.
I DON'T KNOW IF MINIATURE GOLF COURSE WOULD HURT ANYONE, BUT YOU KNOW, SOME OF THEM ARE MORE INDUSTRIAL IN NATURE.
I KNOW, I KNOW THEY EXCLUDED THE, UH, THE ONE BECAUSE THERE WAS A PROPOSAL FOR THE, UH, THE THEATERS AND DRIVE THEATERS A PROPOSAL FOR TINSELTOWN AND THAT DIDN'T GO OVER WELL.
EVERYBODY THOUGHT THAT WAS NOT A SUPPOSED TINSELTOWN DRIVING.
WHAT'S THAT? TINSELTOWN WAS A RIGHT, THERE YOU GO.
UM, BUT I KNOW THAT WAS AN ISSUE BECAUSE THAT, THAT
[02:00:01]
WAS ACTUALLY PROPOSED ON THAT SITE.SO 15 YEARS AGO THEY PROPOSED TO BUILD A DRIVE-IN? NO, IT WAS A TINSEL TOWN.
WHICH WAS WHAT A TINSELTOWN IT'S A MOVIE THEATER.
WHAT'S THAT? A CHAIN? YEAH, THE TINSEL TOWN CHAIN PROPOSED THAT SITE.
I, I THINK I STILL, THE DRAWINGS USED TO BE IN THE OFFICE.
WE USED TO LOOK AT IT A BEAUTIFUL PICTURE.
THE ONLY ONE I KNOW, TINSELTOWN IS IN THE ROCHESTER AREA.
I DUNNO IF THEY STILL EXIST OR NOT.
DO THEY THINK IT WAS APPROPRIATE NEAR SCHOOL AND, AND OTHER REASONS WHY? AND THE BIG MITIGATION FOR THIS PROJECT WAS THE APPLICANT SPENDING A LOT OF MONEY BUILDING RILEY BOULEVARD, WHICH WAS A HUGE MITIGATION BECAUSE
THEY BUILT RILEY BOULEVARD AND THEN NOTHING WENT IN THE BUSINESS PART.
AND AND AGAIN, A LARGE DEGREE IN 2008, YOU KNOW, WHILE WE DIDN'T GET HIT IN WEST BERKELEY DID ELSEWHERE IN THE COUNTRY OFFICE, DEMAND WENT, YOU KNOW, DOWN THE DRAIN BASICALLY.
AND IT'S REALLY NEVER COME BACK IN TERMS OF NEW OFFICE PARK.
DID YOU SAY YOU WERE GONNA GET MAYBE SOMETHING FROM DAVE? I, DAVE SAID HE GLADLY SUBMIT A LETTER.
HE ALSO SAID THAT HE WAS GONNA SEE WHAT FILES THEY HAD AND SEE IF HE HAD ANYTHING THAT MIGHT BE PERHAPS INSIGHT.
SO IF HE HAD SOMETHING I'LL OBVIOUSLY SHARE IT AND HE DID INDICATE, I THINK THAT WAS HIS, PRIMARILY HIS FATHER WHO WAS CAMERON AT THE TIME.
SO WE NEED TO DO A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE SUBDIVISION.
SARAH, DO YOU AGREE? I THINK WE NEED TO, YEAH.
SO WE WOULD ASK YOU TO AT LEAST DO THAT AT THE NEXT MEETING.
REMEMBER THIS IS A CONTINUATION OF THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE BEST USE PERMIT AND SITE RULE IS, RIGHT? I THOUGHT IT WAS.
I THINK IT'S, I DON'T, I I DON'T THINK YOU CLOSED IT.
I THOUGHT YOU CLOSED IT, SO, OKAY, WELL, SO THEN YOU'LL, THAT'S OKAY JUST TO HAVE THE HEARING AGAIN ON ALL THREE TIME.
SO TONIGHT'S NOT A PUBLIC HEARING, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE IT'S CORRECT.
AND NOBODY DON SAY PUBLIC HEARING.
I KNOW, I DIDN'T KNOW THAT YOU THAT'S OKAY.
ANY, IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WHERE WE'RE AT OR HOW WE GOT TO WHERE WE'RE TODAY IN TERMS OF THE UNDERLYING PROJECT? I ALSO DO HAVE REDUCED SIZE COPIES OF THE ELEVATION.
I'VE HINTED THAT OUT SEVERAL TIMES.
BUT AS YOU RECALL, THIS IS A RATHER UPSCALE APPEARANCE IN TERMS OF THE BUILDING ITSELF.
IT'S NOT GONNA LOOK LIKE YOUR PROTOTYPICAL 1986 CAR WASH.
SO I GUESS TO GO FORWARD RIGHT NOW, THE PLAN BE UH, MAKE A MOTION TO SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE SUBDIVISION APPROVAL AND CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT AND SITE PLAN AND SITE.
SPECIAL USE PER PERMIT AND SITE PLAN ON APRIL 21ST.
YOU HAVE A QUESTION? DO YOU GUYS NEED ANYTHING ADDITIONAL FROM ME OR THE APPLICANT AT THIS POINT? WELL I, I'D LIKE TO GET TO UH, HOW THAT NO POWER WASH GOT IN.
I'M NOT WILLING TO TAKE SOMEBODY'S WORD THAT UH, THEY WILLINGLY DID THAT SOMEBODY HAD TO PUT PRESSURE ON.
SO SOMEWHERE I JUST, I WAS READING RIGHT FROM THE COUNT FROM THE DOC.
I AGREE THERE MIGHT HAVE BEEN A REASON THAT WE'LL LOOK INTO IT.
WELL IF YOU READ THE FINDINGS DOCUMENT, IT DOES SAY, ALTHOUGH ALLOWED UNDER ZONING THE FOLLOWING WHICH HAVE A POTENTIAL TO ADVERSELY AFFECT CHARACTER WILL BE PROHIBITED.
SO IT IS A COMMUNITY CHARACTER ISSUE, BUT I'LL FIND OUT HOW IT'S SPECIFICALLY REFERENCING THE DS RIGHT THERE.
AN OPT OUT IF THEY WANTED TO CHANGE.
AND THEN THERE'S THIS STATE AT THE END RIGHT WHERE YOU CAN CHANGE REASON.
ALRIGHT, SO THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA, I THINK WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO IS WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT THE NEXT TWO ITEMS CONCURRENTLY FROM A STANDPOINT.
SO ITEMS SEVEN AND EIGHT ARE DAVID MANKO REQUESTING PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL OF A 67 LOT SUBDIVISION TO BE LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF PARKER ROAD.
[02:05:02]
AND NUMBER EIGHT, LEN WETLAND REQUESTING REZONING OF VACANT LAND LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF BIG TREE ROAD EAST OF 4 2 5 5 MCKINLEY PARKWAY FROM C ONE TO R THREE.SO GOOD EVENING ONCE AGAIN SEAN HOPKINS ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANTS WEZEL DEVELOPMENT.
GLEN WEZEL WHO'S HERE THIS EVENING AS WELL AS DAVE KO.
ALSO WITH ME IS CHRIS WOOD, THE PROJECT ENGINEER FROM CARINA WOOD MORRIS.
AS THE BOARD WILL RECALL, THESE INVOLVE TWO SEPARATE PROJECTS, THE ONES THAT ARE SOMEWHAT RELATED.
FIRST AND FOREMOST WE HAVE THE 67 LOT RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION ON PARKER ROAD PROPOSED BY DAVID MANKO.
WE ARE CURRENTLY AT THE STAGE OF REQUESTING PRELIMINARY CLOUD APPROVAL.
AND THEN SECONDLY WE HAVE THE PROJECT ON THE CONTIGUOUS PROPERTY, APPROXIMATELY 42 ACRES IN SIZE IN WHICH WETZEL DEVELOPMENT IS THE APPLICANT.
THAT PROJECT CONSISTS OF 156 APARTMENTS AND APPROXIMATELY 20.1 ACRES OF PERMANENT GREEN SPACE.
SO THE BOARD HAS EXPRESSED AN INTEREST PREVIOUSLY IN CONNECTION WITH THE COORDINATED ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PURSUANT TO THE STATE ENVIRONMENTAL WATER REVIEW ACT OF CONSIDERING SOME OF THE IMPACTS OF THESE PROJECTS ON A CUMULATIVE BASIS, PRIMARILY BECAUSE OF THE FACTOR, EXCLUSIVELY BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT THEY ARE GEOGRAPHICALLY NEXT DOOR.
I DO WANNA EMPHASIZE AGAIN THEY ARE TWO SEPARATE APPLICANTS IN TWO SEPARATE PROJECTS.
SO IN LIGHT OF THAT DETERMINATION, SEVERAL THINGS HAVE OCCURRED.
NUMBER ONE, THE WETZEL PROJECT BECAUSE IT INVOLVES AN UNDERLYING REZONING, IT WAS ORIGINALLY INVIS THE TOWN BOARD, THE LEGISLATIVE BIDEN ULTIMATELY NEEDS TO MAKE THE DECISION ON THE REZONING WOULD BE THE LEAD AGENCY.
YOU ASKED THE TOWN BOARD TO CONSIDER ALLOWING YOU TO BE THE LEAD AGENCY MEETING THE PLANNING BOARD.
YOU ALSO DID RECOMMEND THAT THE TOWN BOARD GO AHEAD AND HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE REZONING THAT PUBLIC HEARING WAS HELD ON MARCH 22ND.
THE TOWN BOARD OF COURSE DID NOT ISSUE ANY RECOMMENDATIONS OR DECISIONS AT THAT POINT IN TIME BECAUSE PRIOR TO THAT OCCURRING, AS WE DISCUSSED EXTENSIVELY, THEY'LL NEED A RECOMMENDATION PURSUANT TO SEEKER AND THEN AN UNDERLINE, A REQUEST ON THE UNDERLYING REQUESTED REZONING, WHICH WE HAVE PROPOSED SEVERAL ZONING CONDITIONS IN CONNECTION WITH.
IN TERMS OF THE ACTUAL CUMULATIVE IMPACTS, WE WANT TO TOUCH ON WHERE WE ARE COMPARED TO WHERE WE WERE PREVIOUSLY.
NUMBER ONE, UH, CHRIS WOOD DID RECEIVE APPROVAL OF THE DOWNSTREAM SANITARY SEWER CAPACITIES FOR BOTH PROJECTS VIA A LETTER FROM ERIE COUNTY DIVISION OF SEWAGE MANAGEMENT.
THAT LETTER WAS ISSUED ON MARCH 10TH.
KEEPING IN MIND THE MANCO PROJECT ALREADY HAD DOWNSTREAM SANITARY SEWER CAPACITY ANALYSIS.
THE SEWER GOES DOWNSTREAM DOWN INTO OUR SYSTEM FOR WETZEL.
SO IN TERMS OF CUMULATIVE IMPACTS, THE ERIE COUNTY DIVISION OF SEWAGE MANAGEMENT HAS CONCURRED.
THERE IS ADEQUATE DOWNSTREAM SANITARY SEWER CAPACITY FOR BOTH PROJECTS.
WITH THAT BEING SAID, BECAUSE BOTH PROJECTS WILL GENERATE MORE THAN 2,500 GALLONS OF SANITARY SEWER PER DAY, BOTH WILL BE SUBJECT TO THE DE'S STANDARD I AND I POLICY, WHICH IN THE END ACTUALLY IMPROVES DOWNSTREAM SECURITY SEWER CAPACITY ANALYSIS.
SECONDLY, WHEN WE WERE HERE LAST WE DID INDICATE THAT WE HAD ENGAGED SRF ASSOCIATES, REPUTABLE TRAFFIC ENGINEERING FIRM FROM ROCHESTER REPAIR TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY THAT CONSIDERS THE CUMULATIVE IMPACTS OF BOTH PROJECTS.
THEY DID THAT PRIOR TO PROCEEDING WITH THAT.
THEY REACHED OUT TO THE AGENCIES IN TERMS OF THE SCOPE AND ULTIMATELY WHAT THAT SHOWED WAS THAT YES INDEED, UH, THERE IS ADEQUATE CAPACITY ON THE SURROUNDING ROADWAY NETWORK.
THEY HANDLED THIS PROJECT, THERE WERE TWO RECOMMENDATIONS THEY MADE.
THEY PERTAINED TO THE WETZEL PROJECT ON BIGTREE ROAD.
NUMBER ONE, THEY RECOMMENDED THAT THERE BE SOME RE STRIPING WITHIN THE RIGHT OF WAY OF BIGTREE ROAD TO ACCOMMODATE A TURN LANE FOR LEFT HAND TURNS.
WE WOULD IMPLEMENT THAT RECOMMENDATION.
THAT OF COURSE WOULD REQUIRE THE CONCURRENCE IN THE APPROVAL OF THE NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION.
AND I ALSO BELIEVE THEY ASKED FOR THE WESTERN DRIVEWAY TO INCLUDE TWO EXITING LEVELS, MEANING SO THAT IF YOU'RE TURNING LEFT, YOU'RE NOT BLOCKING SOMEONE FROM TURNING LANE.
BOTH OF THOSE ARE FINE, BUT OTHERWISE THERE WAS NO REQUIRED MITIGATION.
AND TO A CERTAIN DEGREE THAT'S NOT THAT SURPRISING GIVEN THAT THE PARKER ROAD SUBDIVISION IS OVER HERE OBVIOUSLY ON PARKER ROAD AND THE ONLY ACCESS FROM THE WETZEL PROJECT IS ON THE BIG THREE ROAD.
AS YOU RECALL, THE BIGGEST ISSUE IN CONNECTION WITH YOU, THE PROJECT IN TERMS OF TRAFFIC WAS ACCESSED ONTO WILSON BASED ON SOME INPUT WE RECEIVED LATE LAST SUMMER, EARLY LAST FALL, THE PREVIOUSLY PROPOSED SUBDIVISION ON THAT SITE WAS ELIMINATED AND REPLACED WITH PERMANENT GREEN SPACE.
AND I DO WANNA EMPHASIZE THE EXTENT SOME PEOPLE MAY BE
[02:10:01]
WATCHING THEIR HOMES.WE ARE NOT PROPOSING ANY ACCESS TO WILSON DRIVE, NOT IN THE FORM OF A PUBLIC ROAD, A DRIVEWAY THAT WOULD BE ACCESSIBLE TO THE PUBLIC OR A GATED EMERGENCY ACCESS.
THERE WILL BE NOTHING CUTTING THROUGH THIS GREEN SPACE.
AND THAT IS ADDRESSED IN THE ZONING SUBMISSIONS THAT I SUBMITTED TO THIS BOARD, UM, A COUPLE MONTHS AGO IN THE FORM OF A LETTER TO CHAIRMAN CLARK AND THE BOARD.
SO WE THINK IN TERMS OF ACTUAL IMPACTS THEY'VE BEEN ADDRESSED.
I DON'T THINK THERE ARE ANY POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS.
IN TERMS OF THE WETZEL PROJECT, AND I'M, I'M HESITANT TO BRING UP THE WORD.
THE BIGGEST CONCERN THE RESIDENTS HAVE HAD THAT HAVE SPOKEN TO US IS ASKING FOR THERE TO BE CONSIDERATION OF CLUSTERING.
I JUST WANNA EMPHASIZE AGAIN, WE'RE WILLING TO DISCUSS THAT IF ULTIMATELY THAT'S OFF THE TABLE, THAT'S FINE.
WE HAVE A PROPOSAL THAT COMPLIES WITH THE CODE, PROVIDES 67 LOTS, PROVIDES ADEQUATE ONSITE AREAS FOR STORMWATER MANAGEMENT.
DOES INCLUDE CODE COMPLIANT PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE.
SO WE THINK WE'VE ADDRESSED THE ISSUES THAT HAVE BEEN RAISED, BUT WE AGAIN WOULD WELCOME ANY INPUT ON EITHER OF THE PROJECTS OR THE COORDINATED ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW OF BOTH PROJECTS WHICH THIS BOARD HAS INDICATED THEY WANNA CONSIDER SOME OF THE IMPACTS ON A CUMULATIVE BASIS.
I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT IN A NUTSHELL.
CHRIS ALSO DID SUBMIT A LETTER TO THE BOARD.
SOME OF YOU RECALL ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT CAME UP WITH STORM WATER MANAGEMENT.
SO CHRIS DID PREPARE A DETAILED LETTER SUMMARIZING HOW THAT WILL BE HANDLED.
BOTH SITES WILL HAVE INDEPENDENT ONSITE STORM WATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS THAT COMPLY WITH ALL THE STANDARDS THAT ARE CITED IN CHRIS'S LETTER.
PRIMARILY STORM WATER QUALITY AND THAT INCLUDES THE GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE REQUIREMENTS AND THEN PERHAPS MORE IMPORTANTLY, STORMWATER QUANTITY.
AND THAT INCLUDES RETAINING ONSITE A HUNDRED YEAR STORM.
JOHN, THEY HAVEN'T SEEN THIS PLAN TO SUPERVISOR.
AND THE OTHER THING YOU ASKED FOR, THANK YOU.
SO YOU DID ASK FOR US TO PROVIDE A PLAN THAT ACTUALLY TOOK BOTH PROJECTS ON THE SAME PLAN.
THIS PLAN YOU HAVEN'T SEEN PREVIOUSLY.
SO WE NOW DO HAVE THAT THE 20.1 ACRES THAT'S HIGHLIGHTED IN GREEN IS A PERMANENT OPEN SPACE AS PROPOSED IN CONNECTION WITH THE WETZEL PROJECT, WHICH YOU CAN SEE IS ACTUALLY CONTIGUOUS TO SEVERAL LOTS WITHIN THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION.
SO THIS DOES SHOW BOTH PROJECTS AND OBVIOUSLY WHAT IT EMPHASIZES THAT OF COURSE THEY ARE DIRECTLY NEXT TO US.
I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE'RE WRAPPING UP.
SORRY, SHOULD WE WELCOME ANY QUESTIONS? WE'RE HOPING THAT THE REVIEW PROCESS FOR BOTH PROJECTS CAN MOVE FORWARD.
AND AGAIN, THEY'RE NOT EXACTLY ON THE SAME TRACK BECAUSE THE WETZEL PROJECT WOULD'VE TO GO BACK TO THE TOWN BOARD FOR A DECISION ON THE REZONING AFTER YOU ISSUE A SECRET DETERMINATION.
AND THEN THE MECO PROJECT IS EXCLUSIVELY IN FRONT OF THIS BOARD IN CONNECTION WITH THE PENDING REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLA APPROVAL.
AND I ALSO WOULD NOTICE SOUND BOARD, I DO, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, CLARK, OR I THINK THEY LEFT THE PUBLIC DRINK OPEN, RIGHT OR NO, THEY SAID THEY'D RESCHEDULED DURING, IN THE FUTURE.
OH, THEY LEFT IT OPEN, SO, RIGHT.
SO ONCE THEY GET A RECOMMENDATION FROM YOU, THEY'RE ALSO GONNA PROVIDE ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PUBLIC.
SO THEY, SO THEY LEFT IT OPEN.
WITHOUT A DATE, SIR, BUT THEY'RE WAITING WITHOUT, YEAH.
UH, SO I HAD A CONVERSATION WITH MARK, THE CHAIRMAN OF THE CONSERVATION ADVISORY BOARD, AND DID SOME DIGGING MYSELF AND RUSH CREEK AND ITS TRIBUTARIES, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE ANY DRAINAGE BLOW ON THESE PROPERTIES.
THEY ARE PART OF THE RUSH CREEK WATERSHED ARE PART, UH, ARE LISTED ON THE 2018 3 0 3 C LIST, AND THEY'RE IMPAIRED FOR PCAL CA AND, AND PHOSPHORUS.
PART OF THE ORIGIN THAT PHOSPHORUS AND NUTRIENT LOADING IS IDENTIFIED AS, AS MUNICIPAL AND RESIDENTIAL AND, AND RUN OFF IN GENERAL, WHICH IS PART OF A QUALITATIVE ISSUE WITH I THINK PROBABLY SOME OF THE DEVELOPMENTS HERE, UM, AND DOWNSTREAM AND ALSO BRUSH CREEK AS HEADWATERS ARE WALLEYE ON GROUND.
SO I GUESS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT STILL CONTINUES TO BE UNANSWERED FOR ME IS REALLY FOCUSING ON HOW WE ARE PROTECTING BRUSH CREEK AND THOSE WATERS, WHICH WERE ALSO IDENTIFIED BY DC IN THEIR WATER.
WE READY POTENTIAL NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION, PARTICULARLY QUALITATIVELY WITH REGARD TO PHOSPHORUS, PARTICULARLY WITH RESIDENTIAL HOMES WHERE PEOPLE MAY BE SPRAYING THEIR LAWN.
UM, WHICH IS, WHICH IS NOT QUITE ADDRESSED, WHAT'S NOT ADDRESSED IN WHAT WE GOT FROM CHRIS
[02:15:01]
WOOD, WHERE TALKING ABOUT QUANTITATIVE.BUT THERE'S DEFINITELY A QUALITATIVE COMMENT HERE THAT I'M, THAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT.
AND I, I BELIEVE MARK WAS, EXPLAIN TO ME ATTENDANCE, I DUNNO IF HE HAS FURTHER COMMENT.
UM, BUT THAT'S DEFINITELY SOMETHING I WANNA SEE ADDRESSED.
AND I THINK THAT WE HAVE TO TALK ABOUT, UM, IN TERMS OF ANY MAPPING AND IDENTIFYING THE TRIBUTARY TO RUSH CREEK THAT CROSS THROUGH THESE PROJECTS, PROXIMITY AND WHAT RIPARIAN AREAS NEED TO HELP MINIMIZE THOSE IMPACTS.
AND IN THOSE AREAS THAT ARE WITH THE DRAINAGE OUTFALL FROM THE STORMWATER POND FACILITIES.
I'LL TAKE A LOOK AT THAT LIST.
BUT DOES, DOES IT SAY RUST CREEK AND ANY OF THE TRIBUTARIES AND 3 0 3, UH, RUSH CREEK AN I'VE GOT A COPY OF THIS.
UM, I JUST WANNA POINT OUT TOO, WE'RE TAKING A FARM FIELD, WHICH IS PROBABLY A VERY LARGE SOURCE OF FERTILIZING AND REPLACING IT WITH THE HOUSES, WHICH, WITH A STORMWATER SYSTEM, WITH A STORM WATER SYSTEM, THE DECK GONNA TREAT THAT WATER BEFORE IT GOES INTO THE DITCH, AS OPPOSED TO NOW WHERE IT'S FERTILIZED AND RUNS OUT UN CONTROLLED.
I GUESS WE WOULD NEED MORE SPECIFICS ON HOW YOU'RE TREATING TO REMOVE PHOSPHOROUS FROM THAT WATER, WHETHER NOT YOU'RE USING SOME SORT OF MINDED OR RETAIN IT, OR WHETHER OR NOT, IF YOU'RE, IF YOU'RE SAYING YOU'RE GONNA BE REMOVING THAT PHOSPHORUS BEFORE IT'S PEAK DISCHARGE, ANY SPECIFIC DOCUMENT ON, WELL, IT'S ON THE, AND ANY OF THE GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE, WATER QUALITY METHODS THAT ARE APPROVED BY D HAVE PHOSPHOROUS REMOVAL, UM, TECHNIQUES WITH IT.
SO LIKE THE BIORETENTION FOR EXAMPLE, WHICH WE'LL PROBABLY USE HERE IS A METHOD OF REMOVING PHOSPHOROUS BEFORE DISCHARGE.
AND ANYTHING YOU CAN QUANTIFY THAT.
I WOULD ALSO NOTE THAT THIS AREA, I THINK WOULD BE COVERED IN ALL THESE AREAS ARE ON THE, OH, I THINK ARE PART OF THE BROADER WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN THAT'S HAPPENING WITH THE ERIE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING THERE IN AN ISSUE 2020 THROUGH 2025 TO DEVELOP A NINE E REPORT, UH, THAT, THAT CONNECTS BACK TO THIS, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT GONNA BE DOING THE TDL OR YOU CAN DO THE 90 E REPORT.
AND MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE, THAT ER COUNTY'S WORKING ON A NINE E REPORT TO COMPLY WITH THE CASE REQUIREMENT ON ADDRESSING THESE.
BUT THAT'S, THAT'S NOT IMPLEMENTED YET.
SO, I DON'T KNOW, THEY, I THINK THEY FINISHED THE FIRST COUPLE PHASES.
IT WOULD BE GOOD TO KNOW WHAT THEIR
AND WHILE WE'RE ON THAT TOPIC, UM, THE CONSERVATION ADVISORY BOARD DID SUBMIT SOME MEMOS THAT THEY WANTED READ INTO THE RECORD ON THESE PROJECTS.
THERE WERE SEVERAL REPRESENTATIVES OF THE CONSERVATION ADVISORY BOARD HERE TODAY.
ANY OF YOU WANNA READ THOSE SO WE CAN PUT THEM ONTO THE RECORD? PLEASE COME ON UP AND LET'S DO THAT.
UH, THE FIRST ONES ON THE, UH, MAPLE SUBDIVISION.
UH, OUR CONCERN FROM THE CONSERVATION ADVISORY BOARD, UH, CONTINUATION OF CHARACTER, THE ONCE QUIET FARM ROAD WITH ANOTHER 67 HOMES ON TOP OF THE 200 ALREADY INSTRUCTED, THAT WAS NUMBER ONE.
NUMBER TWO, THE IMPACT OF THE HOMES ON THE ENVIRONMENT.
STORMWATER CONTAMINATION OF HERBICIDE, PESTICIDES FROM COSMETIC LAWN SCREEN CHEMICALS BEING WASHED DOWNSTREAM VIA RUST CREEK TO LAKE THEORY.
RUST CREEK IS A SPAWNING AREA FOR WALLET AND DRINKING WATER FOR RESIDENTS.
THE ADDED STRESS IN SOUTHBOUND SEWAGE TREATMENT FACILITY, HEAVY RANGE FORCE TO DUMP RUST SEWAGE BY WAYS OF SPEEDY PERMITS IN MIDDLE LAKE.
THE DEVELOPERS COME IN AND LEAVE WITH NO RESPONSIBILITIES TO OUR COMMUNITY.
THEY HAVE ADDED APPROXIMATELY 200 HOMES THAT HAVE TWO OR THREE TIMES PER FAMILY.
PARKER ROAD HAS NO SHOULDERS TO WALK ON A RIGHT FLIGHT.
THEIR PROBLEM SHOULD NOT FALL ON TAXPAYERS.
THE DEVELOPERS ARE MAKING MONEY, GRABBING THEIR ACCOUNT.
THEY HAVEN'T SPENT ANY UP MONEY UPGRADING PARKER ROAD.
THE MASSIVE AMOUNTS OF STORMWATER RUNOFF FROM ALL THESE HOMES, CUR SERVICES CREATES THE ENGINEERS SEE, THEY'RE FOLLOWING GUIDELINES, BUT WHEN YOU ADD UP ALL THE WATER LEAVING THIS AREA, IT'S CAUSING EROSION WATER PROBLEM DOWNSTREAM, WHICH, BUT IN YOUR STATE, P IS ILLEGAL IN CREATING A HARDSHIP TO PRIVATE LANDOWNER DOWNSTREAM ON PARK ROAD SUBDIVISION.
ONE RAINFALL ON ONE ACRE OF IMPERVIOUS MATERIAL CONCRETE, BLACKTOP ROOFING, ET CETERA.
IT'S 27,000 GALLONS OF STORM WATER PER INCH OF RAINFALL.
THAT DOES NOT INCLUDE THE BASEMENT CELL PHONE AND THE CAB RECOMMENDS A FULL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT.
STUDY NUMBER TWO IS THE, UH, SECOND SUBDIVISION HERE, WHICH IS ON PART TWO
[02:20:01]
OF IT.AFTER REVIEWING THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN FOR PROPOSED PARK ROAD SUBDIVISION PROJECT 19.241 AT 42 85 VICTORY ROAD IN WALKING THE SITE OF ON MARCH 25TH, 2021, THEY HAVE THE CONSERVATION BY BOARD RECOMMEND AND ADVISE THE TIME PLANNING BOARD AS FOLLOWS.
THE PROPOSED PROJECT DOES NOT APPEAR TO INCLUDE ANY GREEN SPACE PER TOWN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
THERE IS CONCERN THAT THE RUNOFF FOR MULTIPLE EXISTING SUBDIVISION IMPACTING THE RUST CREEK HEADWATERS LOCAL WATER QUALITY AND THE ABILITY OF THE COMMUNITY TO PARTICIPATE IN BEST USE IN THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
LOW EXACERBATION OF RUST CREEK.
RUST CREEK IS ON, ON NEW YORK STATE.
DEC 3 0 3 DASH D LIST OF IMPAIRED WATERS FOR PATHOGENS, PHOSPHORUS FROM COMBINED SOAR OVERFLOW, URBAN RUNOFF AND MUNICIPAL SOURCES.
A REVIEW OF STORM WATER RETENTION DETENTION PLAN TO CROSS THE COW WHO WILL, WHO WILL MAINTAIN THESE STRUCTURES, WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR KEEPING THE WATER QUALITY LEVEL IN ACCORDANCE WITH NEW YORK STATE, NEW YORK STATE BC STORMWATER REGULATIONS AND COURT CAN'T RECOMMEND POSITIVE DECLARATION.
THERE IS SOME CONCERN FOR POTENTIAL FOR SIGNIFICANT DAMAGE.
SO, SO JUST MAKE SURE WE'RE CLEAR.
THE FIRST ONE WAS THE PARKER ROAD? CORRECT.
AND THEN THE SECOND ONE THAT YOU READ WAS THE, THIS ISE THIS IS MAKEUPS FOR THE, UH, THE REZONE.
THEY BOTH SAID SUBDIVISION, RIGHT? WELL, I, I WAS ALSO CONFUSED BECAUSE THE ONE ON BIGTREE SAYS THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT DOES NOT APPEAR TO INCLUDE ANY GREEN SPACE PER TOWN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, BUT THE ONE OFF BIG TREE, THERE'S, THERE'S A LARGE, UH, OKAY.
SO THAT WAS THE TYPE GOT I NEED THEM FOR I EMAIL.
I'LL EMAIL'S YOU SURE RIGHT NOW.
THEN KAITLIN, YOU HAD OTHER THINGS YOU WANTED TO BRING UP? UH, THAT, THAT WAS, THAT WAS MY PRIMARY LIST TODAY IS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE, THAT WE'RE ADDRESSING THOSE THINGS.
UM, ONE OF THE, I GUESS WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IS UNDERTAKE SOME SORT OF DISCUSSION ON HOW WE'RE DOING THE CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS PROCEDURE AS THE PLANNING BOARD.
OBVIOUSLY THE APPLICANT IS PROVIDING US INPUT AND STUDIES THAT ARE GONNA BE INTEGRATED INTO OUR CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS ON THE IMPACTS PROJECTS.
I GUESS I'M WONDERING WHAT OUR PLAN IS TO PREPARE, UM, THAT, THAT Q ANALYSIS DOCUMENTATION, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE'RE WORKING WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO DO? IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD LIKE THE PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS TO, TO TAKE UP IN A, AS A SUBGROUP, SOME SUBSET OF US? HOW DO YOU WANNA HANDLE US DOING THAT Q ANALYSIS? OKAY, THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.
UM, AND ALSO, IS THERE ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, BECAUSE WE KIND OF NEED TO KNOW THAT OTHERWISE WE KEEP IT WHAT WAS REQUESTED.
WE'LL, WE'LL THAT, BUT WE'D LIKE TO KNOW IF THERE'S ADDITIONAL INFORMATION BECAUSE OTHERWISE IT'S JUST GONNA BE PIECE, I THINK CAITLYN BRINGS AN EXCELLENT POINT BECAUSE OF THE LARGE SIZE OF THESE TWO PROJECTS TOGETHER.
WE DEFINITELY NEED TO HAVE A MORE ORGANIZED AND SYSTEMIC SYSTEMATIC APPROACH TO HOW WE'RE GONNA ANALYZE THE DATA.
I THINK THE OTHER, THE OTHER THING THAT COMES TO MIND HERE TOO IS LOOKING AT THE, AT THE FINDINGS FOR THE BUSINESS MARKET TO THE OTHER FACILITIES THAT THEY WERE TRIGGERING EISS FOR THAT LEVEL OF DEVELOPMENT, FOR THAT LARGE CONVERSION OF AREA.
AND I, AFTER HAVING LOOKED AT THE FINDING STATEMENTS FOR THOSE, I AM INCREASINGLY THINKING THAT THERE'S PROBABLY PRECEDENTS THAT WITHIN THE TOWN FOR SOME OF THESE LARGER AREAS OR LARGER AREAS OF DEVELOPMENT THAT WE MAY WANNA CONSIDER DOING SOME TYPE OF GIS FOR THIS AREA BASED ON THE LAND VERSION, THE COMMUNITY CHARACTER LISTED, LISTED ON A NUMBER OF ITEMS CONSIDER IMPACTS.
AND GIVEN THE PRIOR FINDING STATEMENTS BY THE TOWN, IT, IT MAY BE FOR US TO CONSIDER MOVING TO THE EIS STRUCTURE BASED ON THE LEVEL OF PROJECTS.
I WOULD JUST ASK, I THINK THERE IS ONE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN, OBVIOUSLY REQUIRE TO LOOK AT EACH PROJECT, MEANING YOU'RE LOOKING AT THESE HUMAN BELIEF ON, ON AN INDEPENDENT BASIS.
SO I DON'T THINK THERE'S PRECEDENT.
THERE IS ONE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THESE PROJECTS AND THE PREVIOUSLY A MENTIONED PROJECTS WHERE THERE WERE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENTS.
THOSE PROJECTS WERE GENERIC EISS BECAUSE THE SPECIFICS OF THOSE PROJECTS WEREN'T BUILT.
I THINK IF YOU LOOK BACK AT THE RECORD, UH, YOU'LL SEE THAT, BUT ULTIMATELY YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT.
THESE ARE VERY SPECIFIC PROJECTS AND ULTIMATELY ONLY THE ISSUE OF SECRET INFORMATION.
WE JUST WANNA MAKE SURE ANY INFORMATION YOU NEED, WE WOULD LIKE TO DO OUR BEST TO PROVIDE
[02:25:01]
IT TO YOU.IF YOU THINK IT WOULD BE HELPFUL AS A BOARD FOR THE PROJECT SPONSOR PERSON ON BEHALF BOTH PROJECT SPONSORS TO TAKE COPIES OF ALL THOSE REPORTS AND STUDIES, PUT 'EM IN BINDERS SO THEY CAN BE HANDED OUT TO EVERYONE.
SO LIKE BE IN ONE PLACE, BECAUSE I AGREE THAT'S A USEFUL COMMENT.
IT'D BE NICE TO HAVE EVERYTHING FOR BOTH PROJECT.
YOU KNOW, THE FIRST QUESTION IS HOW DO WE PROCEED WHETHER OR NOT WE'RE GONNA HAVE THE CONSULTANTS OR A SUBGROUP WORK ON SOME OF THESE SEEKER ISSUES? UM, I, I THINK IT'S ULTIMATELY OUR RESPONSIBILITY.
SO BECAUSE THERE'S UH, SOME, SOME REALLY DETAILED THINGS THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO GET INTO, I THINK MAYBE A SUBGROUP OF THE PLANNING BOARD WOULD BE THE BETTER WAY TO GO.
AND I'M ASSUMING, BECAUSE YOU SUGGESTED THAT YOU'RE VOLUNTEERING TO BE ON IT, I WOULD BE HAPPY TO COORDINATE THAT EFFORT.
I'M ASSUMING UNLESS WE WANTED TO SET THAT UP AS A PUBLIC MEETING, UM, IT WOULD NEED TO BE THREE OF US.
AND THEN PRESENTING OUR FINDINGS BACK AT
YEAH, I'M NOT SURE, I GUESS I, JENNIFER, ON HOW WE WOULD HANDLE THAT RELATIVE TO THE MEETING LAW.
AND I WOULD HUNDRED PERCENT THINK IT WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL IF, UH, THE APPLICANT PROJECTS WOULD BE HAPPY TO COMPILE WITH INFORMATION AS WELL AS, YOU KNOW, I USE THAT HERE, UH, THE CONSERVATION FOR ADVISORY BOARD, YOU KNOW, HAVE ANY DOCUMENTATION, STUDIES OR ANALYSIS.
WE'LL LOOK, WE'LL LOOK AT THOSE PROBLEMS. I, I THINK THAT THAT'S THE WAY TO GO.
A, A SUBCOMMITTEE THAT'S NOT A QUORUM, AS LONG AS JENNIFER THINKS THAT WE CAN DO THAT LEGALLY.
UM, IF, IF THROUGH THOSE DISCUSSIONS WE, WE, WE BECOME UNCOMFORTABLE, OF COURSE WE COULD ALWAYS SWITCH AND HAVE PUBLIC HEARINGS.
UH, BUT WHAT DO YOU THINK, JENNIFER? DO YOU ON MUTE? JENNIFER? SORRY.
I WAS GOING TO SAY EXACTLY WHAT BILL JUST SAID.
I THINK JUST STICK WITH THREE MEMBERS.
I CAN ALSO BE PRESENT AT THOSE IF YOU WANTED.
I CAN ALSO BE PRESENT AND, YOU KNOW, ALRIGHT, SO, SO WHY DON'T WE DO THAT? WE'LL, IF WHEN WE HAVE THESE MEETINGS, WE'LL HAVE YOU PRESENT.
SO IF YOU FEEL LIKE WE'RE CROSSING LINE THAT THAT NEEDS, THAT WE CAN'T DO PRIVATELY AMONGST OURSELVES, THAT WE, WE STOP IT AT THAT POINT AND THEN SWITCH TO, TO SOMETHING PUBLIC AND WE PUT TOGETHER A REPORT ON THE FINDINGS.
UM, AND, AND ALSO DOING IT THAT WAY BECAUSE WE WOULDN'T HAVE ANY NOTICE REQUIREMENTS.
WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO DELAY ANYTHING REALLY FOR US TO DO THAT.
SO I, I THINK THAT'S A GOOD WAY TO GO AND BOARD, UH, YOU ASKED EARLIER ABOUT HOW YOU CAN DO THIS BEST, HOW YOU'RE GONNA DO THIS.
AND THAT'S WHAT I STARTED AND, AND YOU'RE GONNA WORK ON IS THAT YOU DO HAVE TWO SEPARATE PROJECTS.
SO YOU HAVE PART ONE OF EAF FOR BOTH PROJECTS.
YOU SHOULD COMPLETE A PART TWO FOR BOTH PROJECTS.
YOU'RE GONNA IDENTIFY ISSUES THAT HAVE POTENTIALLY MODERATE TO LARGE IMPACTS IN THOSE ONES THAT ARE POTENTIALLY MODERATE TO LARGE IMPACTS.
LOOK AT BOTH OF 'EM AND SAY, NOT ONLY ARE YOU EVALUATING, BUT YOU'RE EVALUATING THOSE, DO THEY HAVE A CUMULATIVE IMPACT BASED UPON THEM? FOR EXAMPLE, YOU'VE ALREADY IDENTIFIED POTENTIALLY LARGE IMPACT MARGIN TO LARGE IMPACT FOR TRAFFIC.
AND BOTH OF THEM, THEY'VE DONE A JOINT STUDY.
NOW TO SHOW YOU THAT, OKAY, FROM A CUMULATIVE STANDPOINT, THIS IS NOT GONNA BE A PROBLEM.
CAITLYN, JUST AS YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT IN THE PART TWO SECTIONS, THE APPLICANT BE PROVIDED, ALL THAT INFORMATION SHOULD GO IN THOSE PART TWO BECAUSE IN PART THREE YOU'RE DOING THE ANALYSIS.
YOU'RE SAYING, OKAY, THE IMPACTS OF THIS PROJECT ARE FINE, THERE'S NO CUMULATIVE IMPACTS.
WE CAN MAKE A DECISION ON THAT.
BUT WHERE THOSE, THOSE HAVE POTENTIALLY CUMULATIVE IMPACTS, THEN YOU WANNA LOOK AT THEM TOGETHER.
SO JUST ARRANGE YOUR FOLDER LIKE HE'S TALKING ABOUT IN THOSE SECTIONS.
SOME OF THE SECTIONS WILL EASILY FALL OUT.
THEY'RE NOT, THEY'RE NOT IMPACTS.
BUT THEN THOSE SECTIONS THAT, THAT YOU'LL HAVE TO DO THE EVALUATION THAT HAVE CUMULATIVE, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO LOOK AT DO YOU NEED ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO LOOK AT CUMULATIVE IMPACTS? OKAY.
SOUNDS LIKE THE BIG ONE OF THE BIGGER ISSUES IS THE IMPACTS ON RUSH CREEK AND THE CONDITION OF RUSH CREEK, ET CETERA.
SO THAT, THAT MAY INVOLVE, OBVIOUSLY CAMI INVOLVED IN TRYING TO ANALYZE ARE THERE CUMULATIVE IMPACTS FROM A STANDPOINT OF NOT ONLY WATER QUALITY, WATER QUALITY, BUT ALSO QUALITY AND UH, IN THE FUTURE OF
[02:30:01]
RUSH CREEK.SO THAT ONE DEFINITELY YOU'RE LOOKING AT CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ON.
SO, SO WHATEVER I CAN DO TO HELP WITH THAT, LET ME KNOW.
JUST TO FOLLOW UP ON WHAT DREW SAID, I, YOU KNOW, I OBVIOUSLY DOING A SUBCOMMITTEE WITH ONE THREE MEMBERS IS ACCEPTABLE JUST TO, YOU KNOW, GET FORMALITIES AND THE DOCUMENTATION STARTED.
BUT THERE DEFINITELY ARE CERTAIN FACTORS THAT WILL HAVE TO BE DISCUSSED IN A PUBLIC MEETING RIGHT.
SO NO ONE FEELS THAT THEY'RE NOT GOING HAVE SOME INVOLVEMENT.
EVERYONE WILL, IT'S JUST MORE OF A DOCUMENTATION STARTING PROCESS.
AND IT'S, AND IT'S A UNIQUE SITUATION BECAUSE WE'VE GOT THE, AND WE HAVEN'T RUN INTO THIS BEFORE WHERE WE'RE TRYING TO DO BASICALLY ONE SEEKER FOR TWO SEVEN PROJECTS.
SO IT'S, IT'S AN ADMINISTRATIVE, UH, PROCESS TO HOW WE'RE GOING TO DO THAT AND PUT OUR FINDINGS TOGETHER IN A WAY THAT MAKES SENSE.
AND, UM, SO ARE, IF ARE THE APPLICANTS, I GUESS IF THERE'S TWO HERE, WILLING TO, IF WE COME UP WITH REQUESTS FOR SPECIFIC GI IS GRAPHICS, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOUR TEAM IS WILLING TO PROVIDE OR MAPPING OR ANYTHING THAT, OR, OR CALCULATIONS.
DO YOU HAVE ANY, ANY MORE SPECIFICS ON WHAT YOU'RE ASKING? JUST SO WE ANSWER QUESTION ACCURATELY? UH, NOT YET, BUT I'M, I'M ENVISIONING THAT AS WE GO THROUGH THE ANALYSIS, WE MIGHT WANNA HAVE, HAVE SOME MAPPING OR NUMBERS OR ANYTHING TO, TO BACK UP WHAT WE'RE SAYING SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT FROM WHAT AUTO FILLED IN.
SO YEAH, WE DID, I WANNA MAKE IT CLEAR THE AUTO FILL, SOME OF THE QUESTIONS WERE AUTO FILLED, BUT WE DO TAKE OUR TIME.
SO WE DO MAKE A GOOD EFFORT, BUT ABSOLUTELY IF THERE'S INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE ACCESS TO IT PROVIDE, ABSOLUTELY.
SO THE ONLY THING WE WOULD ALSO ASK AS PART OF THAT PROCESS IS, I DON'T KNOW WHAT, WHEN THAT COMMITTEE OR WHO'S GONNA BE ON, WHEN THEY'RE GONNA MEET, BUT BEFORE THEY ISSUE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE ENTIRE BOARD, I THINK IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE THAT AT LEAST CHRIS AND I, WE PROVIDED AT LEAST ONE OPPORTUNITY WITH THAT COMMITTEE SO THAT IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS, WE CAN DISCUSS THEM AND COLLABORATE ON THEM ONLY BECAUSE WE'RE MOST FAMILIAR WITH THE PROJECT.
I WOULD DEFER TO JENNIFER YEAH, IF CAN ON THE, BUT THAT, THAT'S WHAT I'M LOOKING INTO.
SO I THINK ANYTHING THAT WOULD COME UP WITH ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUIRED FROM THE APPLICANT WOULD HAVE TO BE DISCUSSED IN A PUBLIC SETTING.
SO I THINK AT THAT POINT WE WOULD BE HAVING ENTIRE, THE ENTIRE BOARD THIS.
ALRIGHT, SO, SO HERE'S, HERE'S WHAT I'M THINKING.
SO JENNIFER, AM I UNDERSTANDING THAT, SO WE CAME UP WITH SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR WE START TO, AS WE'RE WORKING THROUGH THIS PROCESS, WE WOULD BRING THAT THE, A SUBCOMMITTEE WOULD BRING THAT BACK TO THE FULL BOARD WITH YOU, UM, ON THE AGENDA AND JUST ACT, YOU KNOW, SAY THIS IS THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUEST.
THERE'S ON THE PUBLIC AGENDA FORMALLY REQUESTED OR MECHANISM HERE.
I CAN ALSO ALWAYS BE IN CONTACT WITH SEAN.
OH YEAH, AS FAR AS YEAH, AS FAR, YEAH.
I WANNA CLARIFY IF, IF IT'S THE INITIAL PURPOSE OF THE COMMITTEE IS TO FIND OUT WHAT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION YOU HAVE.
WE DON'T NEED TO BE INVOLVED WITH THAT.
YOU GUYS CAN SHARE IT ONCE YOU'VE GOT IT, THAT'S FINE.
HERE, HERE'S WHAT I'M THINKING.
SO BY FRIDAY, IF SOMEONE WANTS TO VOLUNTEER TO BE ON THIS SUBCOMMITTEE, LET ME KNOW.
AND MEETINGS HOPEFULLY WOULD HAPPEN EARLY NEXT WEEK.
AND I, WELL I I'D LIKE TO, I NOT COMMIT TO ANYTHING ON SCHEDULE.
IT'S GONNA DEPEND ON WHO'S WILLING TO SIT ON THIS AND WHAT THEIR SCHEDULE AND COMMITMENTS ARE.
I MEAN UNFORTUNATELY THIS IS A LARGE ANALYSIS A ARE GONNA HAVE TO ACCEPT THAT IT'S TAKE A LITTLE BIT THROUGH THIS.
NOR DO WE HAVE THE BINDERS THAT THEY OFFER TO PROVIDE YET THE HARD COPIES.
IF YOU HAVE ALL, YOU DO HAVE ALL THE HARD COPIES, THERE'S NOT IN BINDER.
OKAY, LET'S HOW, HOW ABOUT INSTEAD OF GIVING DATES, UH, I'LL GO THROUGH THE STEPS THAT I'M THINKING.
UH, WE'LL TAKE VOLUNTEERS FOR THE SUBGROUP.
'CAUSE I'M NOT GONNA FORCE ANYBODY TO, TO DO SOMETHING LITTLE BIT EXTRA.
UM, SO PRETTY SOON THEN THE SUBGROUP WILL WORK ON COMPILING THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ONCE THEY HAVE A LIST OF THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT THEY WANT.
THAT LIST CAN BE SENT TO THE ENTIRE PLANNING BOARD AND THEN BECOME PART OF OUR PUBLIC RECORD.
AND THEN SENT TO THE APPLICANT.
WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO PUBLISH THAT LIST AT A MEETING.
IT WOULD BECOME PART OF THE RECORD.
BUT WE COULD, WE COULD DO, WE COULD SEND THEM THE LIST IN BETWEEN MEETINGS.
WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO WAIT FOR ANOTHER MEETING TO ASK THEM THE THINGS IN THE LIST.
THEN THEY RESPOND MORE WORK IS DONE, THEN IT GOES IN FRONT, THEN
[02:35:01]
IT, THEN IT'S PRESENTED AT A PUBLIC MEETING THAT'S NOTICED.AND WE WOULD WAIT TO PROVIDE THE PROJECT BINDERS UNTIL YOU LET US KNOW WHAT ELSE YOU WANT.
IS THAT, I THINK THAT WOULD BE THE MOST PRODUCTIVE, I THINK IT BE HELPFUL TO HAVE WHAT WE HAVE SO THAT WE YEAH, I THINK SHE WANTS TO LOOK AT WHAT WE HAVE SO SHE CAN FIGURE OUT WHAT'S MISSING.
I THINK IT WOULD BE PREFERABLE FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE BOARD AND THE PUBLIC.
WE HAVE WHAT WE HAVE NOW BEFORE WE ORGANIZE IT INTO ONE COHERENT DOCUMENT.
I THINK GONNA BE MORE HELPFUL TO KNOW WHAT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, I DUNNO, WE'RE GONNA DO THAT PROCESS.
I DUNNO HOW WE'RE GONNA KNOW THAT UNTIL WE'VE GOT EVERYTHING IN FRONT OF US AT ONCE.
I THINK THINK THERE'S A CHICKEN AND THE EGG HERE I THINK HAVE THAT.
YOU DO HAVE, AND I, I RECOGNIZE THAT THE, THE APPLICANTS HAVE A VESTED INTEREST OF NOT GOING THROUGH EIS PROCESS, WHICH IS ONE OF THE MORE TRADITIONAL MECHANISMS TO DO THIS.
SO I GUESS WE NEED A LITTLE BIT OF PATIENCE AS WE NAVIGATE THIS OTHER PROCESS.
WE'RE, WE'RE CERTAINLY GONNA PATIENT ABSOLUTELY.
I'M JUST TRYING TO ASK FOR CLARIFICATION THERE.
I'LL DO WHATEVER ULTIMATELY, YOU KNOW, WE WANNA DO OUR BEST TO HELP YOU WITH THE INFORMATION WE NEED.
SO KATELIN, ARE YOU SAYING THAT WHAT YOU WANT IN THE BINDER IS EVERYTHING THAT YOU ALREADY HAVE JUST ORGANIZED IN ONE SPOT? LIKE WITH A TABLE OF CONTENTS? YEAH, WITH THE TABLE OF CONTENTS AND YOU KNOW, SO WE HAVE ALL THE PROJECTS ONE SPOT, WE HAVE ALL THIS, THE COMBINED STORM WATER ANALYSIS.
OBVIOUSLY IF WE DON'T NEED THE, THE DOWNSTREAM SANITARY WHO ARE, FOR EXAMPLE, ONE ANALYSIS COVERED BOTH, I THINK THAT THAT ANALYSIS THAT WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT THAT'S BOTH IS WHAT WE NEED.
SO THAT WE KNOW THAT WHICH ONES ARE ALREADY AND WHICH ONES WE'RE JUST ON ONE PROJECT AND WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT FOR THIS PARTICULAR ANALYSIS.
I THINK WE CAN GET, WE CAN, WE CAN DO THAT FAIRLY EASILY.
AND THE ONLY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION WE WOULD PROBABLY NEED WOULD BE DIFFERENT SPECIFIC GIS MAPS THAT WE REQUEST.
EVERYTHING ELSE WE ALREADY HAVE.
I WOULD SAY THAT THERE'S DEF AS WITH ANY RESEARCH EFFORT, THERE'S ALWAYS THE POTENTIAL THAT YOU'RE GONNA IDENTIFY OTHER RESOURCES FINDING.
THINK AND I BOTH QUESTIONS ABOUT FRESH CREEK AND SOME OF THE PLANS.
I'M ASSUMING THERE'S OTHER DOCUMENTATION THAT MAY COME UP AS WE'RE RESEARCHING AND MAYBE OUR DETERMINATION OF COMPATIBILITY AND COMMUNITY CHARACTER AND RESOURCES.
I MEAN, SO DO THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE WANT US THOSE BINDERS ELECTRONICALLY, PHYSICALLY BOTH.
I, I WOULD PREFER ELECTRONICALLY WOULD I WOULD GO, I WOULD LIKE BOTH THAT OPTION.
BUT YOU WOULD MCC CLARK, AND THEN ONCE YOU LAST NOTE ON THERE, LET KNOW THE PREFERENCE.
I LIKE TO AVOID BECAUSE I'M JUST AT MY OWN PERSONAL FILES OKAY.
AND IT'S EXTENSIVE FROM THE EMAILS WE'VE GOTTEN TO THIS POINT.
I THINK IT JUST MAKES SENSE WHEN YOU'RE TRYING TO ORGANIZE, TRYING TO TAKE NOTES TO REFER BACK TO DENNIS PAPER OR EMAIL OR BOTH.
BUT WAIT, AM I GONNA GET THE INITIAL BINDER? WHAT? LET'S MAKE SURE WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE.
THE INITIAL BINDER OF THE PROJECT INFORMATION TO DATE.
AM I GETTING THAT TO THE WHOLE BOARD, TO THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE? BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND I YEAH, THAT, THAT'S A VALID QUESTION.
UM, I THINK THE, I WAS JUST GOING TO SUGGEST, WHY DON'T WE COME UP WITH A COMMITTEE FIRST AND THEN SEAN OKAY.
YOU'RE GONNA MAKE AN ELECTRONIC COPY.
LEAST ME IF ANYONE ELSE CAN HAVE, IF, IF ANYBODY ELSE WANTS A PAPER COPY, WE, WE KNOW THAT, UH, KAILIN AND MEGAN BOTH WANT YEP.
IF ANYBODY ELSE WANTS A PAPER COPY, WE CAN REQUEST IT.
WE AND EVERYTHING SUBMITTED AS PUBLIC RECORD COURSE.
SO IF IT WAS THERE A REASON WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR VOLUNTEERS OR DISCUSSING WHO WANTS TO BE PART OF THAT SUBCOMMITTEE NOW SO THAT IT'S ON THE PUBLIC RECORD AND DISCLOSED AND THAT YOU'D WANNA WAIT TO HAVE PEOPLE BACK YOU UP LINE? UM, HONESTLY, I'M HOPING THAT TWO OTHER PEOPLE VOLUNTEER SO I DON'T HAVE TO BE ON IT.
SO I WAS GONNA SEE, I WAS GONNA LET PEOPLE VOLUNTEER, UH, ANONYMOUSLY AND, AND SEE HOW MANY THERE WERE.
UM, BUT THEN, SO THAT'S, THAT'S NOT A GOOD REASON.
SO WHAT WAS THAT? I SAID I THINK IF I ASKED FOR A BINDER, I'VE NOW VOLUNTEERED MYSELF, SO.
ANY TAKERS ALL YOU'RE STILL MUTED.
[02:40:01]
ON THE SUBCOMMITTEE WILL BE, UH, THE CHAIRMAN, VICE CHAIRMAN AND THE SECRETARY.SO WERE YOU GONNA TABLE US TO THE NEXT, WE ON THE AGENDA TABLE? THE NEXT MEETING SOUNDS GOOD TO ME.
UNLESS THERE'S SOMETHING ELSE THAT PEOPLE THINK WE CAN ACCOMPLISH ON THIS PROJECT TODAY.
ALRIGHT, SO WHAT I WILL DO IS I WILL TABLE DAVID MANKO AND GLEN WETZEL.
I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE DAVID MANKO AND GLEN WEZEL TO APRIL 21ST.
THAT WAS THE END OF OUR AGENDA.
I THINK THAT WHAT? NO, IT'S, I, I UNDERSTAND THAT DENNIS.
UM, I MEAN CAITLYN SUGGESTED IT JUST NOW THAT THE FIRST I HEARD OF IT AND I FELT LIKE THAT WAS A BETTER WAY TO GO GIVEN THE SPECIFIC NATURE OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR AND ASKING FOR THAN TO TRY AND HAVE THE CONSULTANTS DO IT AND HAVING TO GO BACK AND FORTH FOUR OR FIVE TIMES.
SO IT WAS, I MEAN, GOING INTO THIS MEETING, I DIDN'T KNOW THAT WE WERE GONNA SET UP A DENNIS.
IF I DID, I WOULD'VE GIVEN A HEADS UP THAT THOUGH.
IS I BELIEVE WE HAVE MINUTES? YES, WE DO.
IS THAT WHAT WE'RE AT? THERE'S OTHER BUSINESS FROM SARAH? NO, NO OTHER BUSINESS.
OH, YOU KNOW, ONE THING I I GUESS, WELL, EVERYBODY LEFT, IT'S TOO LATE.
I WAS GONNA, UH, REMIND PEOPLE THAT THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS APRIL 20TH.
SO PEOPLE THAT ARE SHOW UP TO THESE MEETINGS ARE PROBABLY INTERESTED IN THE TYPE OF THINGS THAT WILL BE DISCUSSED AT THAT MEETING AND THEY SHOULD ATTEND.
SO GO ONLINE ON THE TOWN'S WEBSITE AND REGISTER.
ANYBODY WHO'S WATCHING THIS ON FACEBOOK, IT'S JUST A FEW POSTS LOWER THAN THIS VIDEO BILL.
WHAT'S THE FORMAT OF THAT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MEETING? ARE YOU GONNA BE FORMAL COMMENTS PUBLIC AT THAT TIME OR DISTRICT OUTLAY THE PROCESS? UM, I CAN COMMENT ON THAT.
CAITLYN, THERE WILL BE ABILITY FOR PEOPLE TO COMMENT.
THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO, THERE'S AN EXPLANATION OF RAISING THEIR HAND.
THEY CAN TYPE IN QUESTIONS, ET CETERA, BUT IT WILL BE A LITTLE BIT OF BACK AND FORTH.
BUT YOU'RE RIGHT, IT'S THE FIRST TIME WE'RE GONNA INTRODUCE THE PROJECT, SHOW SOME THINGS, WHAT WE'RE DOING, HOW PEOPLE CAN BECOME PART OF THE PROCESS, BUT THERE WILL BE OPPORTUNITIES FOR PEOPLE TO INPUT.
WE'RE GONNA DISCUSS THE RESULTS OF THE SURVEY, THE 1800 SURVEY RESPONSES TO GET PEOPLE THINKING ABOUT WHAT THEIR NEIGHBORS ARE SAYING.
SO IF PEOPLE WANNA, THERE WILL BE OTHER PUBLIC MEETINGS TYPICALLY IN A CONGRESS.
THEN THERE'S A, YOU KNOW, MORE ROBUST INPUT PART.
HERE'S THE, HERE'S THE PARTS OF THE PLAN.
THERE'S THEN TOWARDS THE END, WHERE DID WE HEAR YOU CORRECTLY? AND THEN THERE'S OBVIOUSLY PUBLIC HEARING REQUIREMENTS.
THERE ARE ALSO GONNA BE DIFFERENT.
WE JUST DID THE SURVEY PART OF IT.
THERE'S OTHER FORMS OF WHERE PEOPLE ARE GONNA BE ABLE TO INPUT TO THIS.
SO WE HIRED A SEPARATE COMPANY UNDER OUR TO HELP WITH THAT.
THAT'S ALL THEIR FOCUS IS TRYING TO GET PUBLIC INPUT.
THEY'VE EVEN STARTED CALLS THE STAKEHOLDER GROUPS, ET CETERA.
SO THEY'RE, THEY'RE, THEY'RE GONNA COME UP WITH MANY DIFFERENT METHODOLOGIES TO RECEIVE PUBLIC INFLUENCE.
[02:45:02]
DID I HEAR YOU MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS TYPED? UH, I DID NOT MAKE IT YET, BUT I CAN MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM THE MARCH 17TH MEETING.A MOTION TO ADJOURN OUR MEETING.