[00:00:10]
I THINK IT'S ON WHEN ALL THE MEETINGS WERE JUST SMALL.
SO, UH, WE'LL GET STARTED WITH THE WORK SESSION.
UH, ONE ITEM ON THE WORK SESSION, ROYAL WASH DEVELOPMENT LLC, REQUESTING REZONING OF A THREE QUARTER ACRE LOT AT 3, 2, 3, 1, AND 3 2, 3 3 LAKESHORE ROAD FROM M THREE TO C TWO THAT APPLICANT IS ASKED TO BE TABLED.
SO THEY'LL BE ON THE WORK SESSION FOR OUR NEXT MEETING OCTOBER 4TH.
SO WE'RE GONNA TAKE THIS TIME TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION AND DISCUSS ISSUES RELATING TO POTENTIAL LITIGATION, UH, ON ITEM SIX OF OUR AGENDA, A L ASPHALT AS WELL AS ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE.
ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE TO CHOOSE LITIGATION.
YOU CAN SAY NO, YOU, I GONNA SAY IT EASIER GUYS.
[00:31:15]
PUBLIC[00:31:16]
STANCE?[00:31:17]
ONE[00:31:17]
NATION[00:31:18]
UNDER[00:31:19]
GOD, INDIVIDUAL WITH LIBERTY JUSTICEFIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS PUBLIC HEARING.
SX HOLMES REQUESTING APPROVAL OF A REVIVE PLAT FOR NILES AAV SUBDIVISION TO MERGE FLAG LOTS.
SO THIS IS A PROJECT THAT WE'VE HAD IN FRONT OF US IN THE PAST.
WE ACTUALLY APPROVED IT WITH TWO MORE LOTS THAN THEY'RE REQUESTING.
UM, THEY'RE CHANGING THE SITE PLAN, WHICH IS WHY WE HAVE TO DO ANOTHER PUBLIC HEARING, BUT THEY'RE REDUCING THE NUMBER OF LOTS.
ANYTHING BEFORE WE GET INTO THE PUBLIC HEARING? NO, I THOUGHT THAT WE DISCUSSED THE LAST MEETING AND MAYBE THIS JUST DIDN'T HAPPEN.
THE POSSIBILITY OF GOING OUT TO VISIT ONE OF YOUR OTHER PROJECTS WHERE YOU ACCEPT ACTIVELY IN CONSTRUCTION, YOU'RE ALWAYS WELCOME TO ANYTIME YOU'D LIKE.
SO I DON'T KNOW WHO WE COORDINATE DONE THAT.
UH, 202,000 IS MY CELL NUMBER.
WOULD YOU LIKE, WHAT'S THAT? WHERE WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO FROM? DO I BLOCK THAT IF I YEAH, YOU'LL BLOCK THAT.
UM, DO WE NEED A PRESENTATION? WE JUST GO INTO THE PUBLIC HEARING? WE GONNA DO WOULD INCLUDE, UH, SECRET.
WELL THAT WOULD WE, WE HAVE TO HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING FIRST, SO WE GOTTA OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING AND THEN WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT.
YOU READ THE NOTICE, PLEASE? SURE.
NOTICES HEREBY GIVEN THAT THAT THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD WILL CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING ON A PROPOSED, ON A PROPOSAL BY ESSEX HALLS TO AMEND THE PRELIMINARY FLAG FOR A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED 14 LOT SUBDIVISION INTO A 12 LOT SUBDIVISION LOCATED AT NILES AVENUE.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD SEPTEMBER 20TH AT 7:00 PM IN ROOM SEVEN B ON THE HAMBURG TOWN HALL.
ALRIGHT, AT THIS TIME I'LL OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ESSEX HOLMES.
ANYONE THAT HAD ANY COMMENTS ON THIS PROJECT OR THE SECOND TIME ANYBODY WOULD COMMENT ON NILES AVE PROJECT.
FOR THE THIRD AND FINAL TIME, ANY COMMENTS ON THIS PROJECT BEING NONE? I WILL NOW CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
SOMEONE IS COMING IN ON FACEBOOK, BUT I CAN'T PULL IT UP.
I THINK IT WAS PROBABLY THAT WE LOST IT.
SO WE HAVE GRABBED RESOLUTIONS, WHICH WE'VE GOT A SEEKER, WE'VE GOT SITE PLAN WITH SOME NDI.
I THINK THE ONE WE WANNA MAKE SURE WE'RE OKAY WITH IS NUMBER EIGHT.
I AM STRUGGLING TO GET THE LINKS TO WORK AND OUR SHAREPOINT TODAY.
YEAH, THE QUICK LINKS FOR, THERE WAS NO LINK.
THERE WAS NO LINK TODAY FOR TODAY'S MEETING.
THERE WAS, WELL THERE WAS, BUT THEY DON'T WORK.
BUT JOSH SENT US A SEPARATE EMAIL WITH THE RESOLUTION.
WELL I WAS JUST WONDERING IF WE GOT THE OTHER INFORMATION ABOUT THE TREE COUNTS AND THE PRESERVATION THAT WE ASKED FOR AT THE LAST MEETING.
[00:35:05]
WE, YOU DID GET LETTER, DIDN'T YOU? WELL, THAT'S WHAT I WAS, I DUNNO IF THAT'S SEEING SENT A DIFFERENT LETTER THAN YOU HAVE A COPY OF, OF THE APPLICANT'S ATTORNEY'S LETTER, WHICH BASICALLY SHOWED YOUR ORIGINAL APPROVAL OF THIS PROJECT INCLUDED 10 CONDITIONS.THE APPLICANT HAS ASKED FOR AN ADJUSTMENT TO THOSE 10 CONDITIONS BECAUSE OF THE LOTS BEING REDUCED.
UM, AND IF YOU WANTED, WE TALKED ABOUT IT A LITTLE BIT, YOU HAD SOME, SOME DISCUSSIONS ON ON THOSE CHANGES, BUT WE DID NOT MAKE A DECISION.
YEAH, BUT I ASK, HOW COME I DIDN'T, WE DIDN'T AMEND THE RESOLUTION YET BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T COME TO A CONCLUSION.
UM, SO AGAIN, THEY'RE HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THOSE AMENDMENTS THEY'RE REQUESTING.
AGAIN, WE WOULD NORMALLY JUST REAPPROVE THIS PRELIMINARY PLAQUE.
IT'S A REDUCED NUMBER OF LOTS, BUT THEY WANTED SOME REVISIONS TO THE CONDITIONS THAT WERE PLACED BECAUSE SOME OF THE CONDITIONS RELATED TO BUFFERS BECAUSE OF THE LAYOUTS OF THE, OF THE LOTS.
AND NOW WITH THE LOTS BEING LESS, THEY'RE ASKING FOR THOSE BUFFERS TO CHANGE.
AND ALSO THERE WAS A REQUIREMENT OF WAS IT SIX TREES PER LOT WITH A TOTAL OF, AND THERE WAS A NUMBER SIX TIMES 12 LOT.
AND NOW THERE THAT THEY WERE SAYING, WELL NOW THE TOTAL SHOULD BE, SHOULD BE 12 TIMES SIX LOT.
THERE'S ALSO REQUESTS FOR THE CERTAIN TYPES OF TREES THAT WERE PLANTED.
UH, IN CERTAIN SECTIONS WE ASK FOR FOUR INCH CALIBER TREES OR THE EQUIVALENT OF A, AN EVERGREEN MM-HMM
UH, YOU CAN, AND I DO AGREE WITH THE APPLICANT, UH, FOUR INCH TREES ARE VERY DIFFICULT TO OBTAIN AND ALSO THEY HAVE A HIGH MORTALITY RATE.
SO THE DISCUSSION WAS, WHAT IS THE EQUIVALENT IN A, IN A EVERGREEN TREE, TYPICALLY, AND I ASKED MY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS, THE EQUIVALENT OF SOMETHING LIKE THAT WOULD BE ABOUT A EIGHT FOOT TALL EVERGREEN.
YOU'RE NOT GONNA GET A, AGAIN, YOU'RE NOT GONNA GET A FOUR INCH DIAMETER EVERGREEN.
THAT WOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE TO FIND.
IT WOULD HAVE A VERY DIFFICULT MORTALITY RATE.
SO OUR SUGGESTION IS IF YOU'RE GONNA CHANGE THAT SECTION THAT YOU WOULD CHANGE IT TO, UH, THOSE FOUR INCH CALIBER TREES CHANGED TO AN EIGHT FOOT EVERGREEN TREE WOULD BE OUR RECOMMENDATION ON THAT AS AN EQUIVALENT.
UH, THE OTHER ONES YOU GUYS WERE DISCUSSING ABOUT, I THINK THE REDUCTION IN OVERALL NUMBER IS FINE AS LONG AS THEY STILL DID THE SIX TREES PER LOT.
AND THEN THERE WAS A CHANGE IN WHERE AND TYPES OF THE CONSERVATION AREAS, IF YOU REMEMBER.
THAT'S WHY YOU HAVE, YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU THE TWO, THE TWO LAYOUTS OF THE, OF THE, THE ORIGINAL, UH, APPROVED ONE AND THEN THIS ONE.
UNDER THIS ONE YOU'RE REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF LOTS AND YOU DON'T HAVE THOSE FLAG LOTS THAT WERE ON THE OLD ONE.
SO THEY'RE ASKING FOR A SLIGHT CHANGE TO THE APPROVAL OF THAT.
SO AGAIN, WE'RE HERE, THE APPLICANT'S HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTION.
THE IDEA IS HERE TO REP PASS THE SAME RESOLUTION WITH IF YOU'RE GONNA MAKE MINOR MODIFICATIONS THROUGH THOSE CONDITIONS BASED UPON THE REDUCTION IN NUMBER OF LIVES.
WE'RE ALSO ASKING THE PLANNING BOARD AND WE'RE, WE APOLOGIZE ABOUT FOR THIS, BUT TO ACTUALLY ISSUE THE SECRET NEGATIVE DECLARATION.
WE SPENT THREE MEETINGS DISCUSSING AN EGG DECK AND PERFECTING IT.
AND THEN WHEN WE GOTTA THE LAST MEETING, WE SPENT TWO HOURS DISCUSSING THE CONDITIONS AND FORGOT TO IT THE NECK DECK.
ALTHOUGH THE PART ONE, TWO AND THREE WERE COMPLETED, WE DID NOT, WE, WHEN WE WENT THROUGH THE FILES, THERE NEVER WAS ACTUAL MOTION TO ISSUE THE MAG DECK.
SO, SO INTERRUPT ME IF I'M WRONG HERE.
UH, TRY AND TAKE THE CHANGE BY CHANGE.
UH, NUMBER SEVEN, WE ORIGINALLY SAID PLANTING OF A NATIVE MIXTURE OF 70 TREES OF A MINIMUM OF TWO AND A HALF INCH CALIBER.
AND WHAT YOU WANT US TO DO IS REDUCE THAT TO 60 BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING FROM 14 LOTS TO 12 LOTS AND IT STILL WOULD BE FIVE PER LOT.
THAT'S, THAT'S YOUR REQUEST, CORRECT? YEAH.
AND WHAT DO THE PEOPLE IN THE PLANNING BOARD FEEL ABOUT THAT REQUEST? I'M FINE WITH THAT.
SO, AND THE REASON WHY I'M FINE WITH IT IS BECAUSE IN THE PREVIOUS MEETING, UM, THEY INDICATED THAT THERE'S GONNA BE A LOT MORE TREES ON THOSE, ON THOSE LOTS THAT ARE GONNA SERVE AS BUFFER, UM, RIGHT ALONG THE PROPERTY LINE, IF I RECALL CORRECTLY.
AND THAT, UM, SO THEY'RE NOT TAKING DOWN AS MANY TREES, SO THEREFORE THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE TO REPLACE THAT NUMBER.
SO AT THE LAST MEETING THOUGH, WE HAD ASKED IF THEY COULD GO OUT THERE AND PROVIDE US A ROUGH ESTIMATE OF THE ADDITIONAL AMOUNT OF LIKE WE REQUESTED ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.
SO I GUESS MY, MY ONLY COMMENT AT THE MOMENT IS WITHOUT THEM PROVIDING THAT BACKUP INFORMATION, I'M RELUCTANT TO MAKE A DECISION AT THIS TIME.
'CAUSE WE HAD ASKED FOR THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IN THE LAST MEETING.
CAN YOU PROVIDE, DO YOU HAVE THAT INFORMATION
[00:40:01]
NOW? I I CAN CERTAINLY, UH, SPEAK TO THE TOPIC AND SPEAK TO THE DILIGENT FOLLOW-UP THAT'S OCCURRED SINCE THAT MEETING RIGHT THROUGH THIS DATE, INCLUDING, UM, MULTIPLE EMAILS INCLUDING AN OFFER AT THE LAST MEETING.ANYBODY THAT WOULD WANT TO JOIN US IN ANY OF OUR COMMUNITIES, SO WHICH WE'RE VERY PROUD IS ALWAYS WELCOME TO.
I WOULD REITERATE THAT, UM, I MEAN IT'S UH, UH, OBVIOUS CONCLUSION THAT THE REDUCTION OF TWO LOTS ON THE SAME SURFACE AREA IS GONNA RESULT IN, IN MOST ANY CIRCUMSTANCE, REDUCTION ON THE, UM, LOSS OF CURRENT VEGETATION.
WE WOULD BE PROVIDING THE SAME NUMBER OF TREES ON A PER LOT BASIS THAT WAS REQUIRED.
SO WE WOULD BE SAVING MORE VEGETATION THAN INITIALLY BECAUSE WE HAVE LESS LOTS.
WE WOULD BE PROVIDING THE SAME NUMBER OF TREES ON A BASIS, UM, ON EACH LOT.
AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT NUMBER OF TREES IS FIXED PER LOT.
THE TOWN CODE IS FOR TWO STREET TREES PER LOT AND, UM, WE'RE NOT HERE CHALLENGING THE REQUEST FOR A TOTAL OF SIX TREES PER LOT, WHICH IS SUBSTANTIAL IN AN AREA THAT'S ALREADY WOODED.
LASTLY, I WOULD ALSO NOTE THAT THE PRIOR DESIGN, IF ANYBODY WERE TO LOOK CLOSELY AT THAT AS COMPARED TO THE CURRENT DESIGN, ABSOLUTELY WOULD'VE RESULTED IN A SUBSTANTIAL NUMBER OF LOTS BEING, BEING LOST IN THE, IN THIS AREA, UM, BECAUSE OF THE LOTS THAT WE'VE REMOVED WOULD'VE JUST BEEN, BEEN COMPLETELY CLEARED AND FI FINALLY, I'LL ADD ONE MORE POINT AND THEN WE SHORTEN THE CUL-DE-SAC, WHICH WILL ALLOW US TO PROVIDE SOME BUFFER AREA HERE THAT WE THINK IS THE PERFECT PLACE FOR SOME OF THE, UH, PINE TREES THAT ARE, ARE ASKED OF US.
UM, SO WE BELIEVE AND WE FOLLOWED UP DILIGENTLY THAT WE'VE TRIED TO PROVIDE EVERY OPPORTUNITY FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND WE'VE ANSWERED EVERYTHING THAT'S BEEN ADDED, AN ESTIMATED NUMBER ON THE ADDITIONAL TREES THAT WOULD BE SAVED BY THIS PLAN VERSUS THE PRIOR PLAN THAT, I MEAN, THAT'S WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR.
AND THEN I HADN'T HEARD ANY FOLLOW UP.
YOU KNOW, CINDY AND I WENT OUT AND LOOKED AT ANOTHER DEVELOPMENT AS A FOLLOW UP EARLIER THIS WEEK AND HADN'T HEARD ANYTHING BACK ABOUT COMING OUT AS A SITE VISIT, BUT HAPPY TO, HAPPY TO COME OUT NOT BEING THE DEVELOPER OF THE PRIOR PLAN OR HAVING BUILT THAT PLAN.
UM, IT'S HARD TO SAY WHAT THEY WOULD'VE DONE, BUT I WOULD SAY IT WOULD BE IN EXCESS OF TWO TREES PER LOT IN ADDITION THAT WE WOULD BE SAVING AS COMPARED TO WHAT YOU'VE ALREADY APPROVED.
AND WE'VE INCREASED MORE THAN 25 SPACE AREA MORE THAN 25.
DEMONSTRATE WHERE YOU GOT THAT FROM OR LIKE, WELL IT'S HARD TO SAY WHEN WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE X IS.
THE X THAT YOU'VE ALREADY APPROVED, CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT THAT NUMBER WAS? SO I THINK MY Y THE ASK AT THE LAST MEETING WAS IS THAT YOU INCREASE THE BUFFER WIDTH, THE BACK OF THE LOTS AND THAT THERE WAS GONNA BE SOME ESTIMATE OF THE ADDITIONAL DEPTH, THE BUFFER THAT SOMEBODY WAS GONNA GIVE US A BALLPARK OF HOW MANY ADDITIONAL TREES WERE IN THE ADDITIONAL OFF AREA.
SO, SO IN THIS BUFFER AREA IT WAS, UH, 60 FEET AND I BELIEVE NOW IS 80 FEET.
MY ESTIMATE FOR A SAVED ALL THE VEGETATION WILL WILL BE SAVED.
MY ESTIMATE FOR TREES ALONE IN THAT AREA WOULD BE, UM, TWENTY FIVE, A HUNDRED FIFTY 3000 FEET.
UM, APPROXIMATELY 10 TREES THERE, APPROXIMATELY FIVE TREES HERE, IT'S HALF THE SIDE, A LITTLE MORE THAN HALF THE SIZE.
SO 15 ADDITIONAL SAVED, SAME AMOUNT PLANTED.
THAT'S IN THAT AREA ALONE, LET ALONE WHAT WE WON'T CLEAR AS COMPARED TO WHAT YOU HAD APPROVED PREVIOUSLY.
SO 15 ADDITIONAL TREES SAVED BY THE INCREASE OF THE BUFFER.
UM, SO BACK TO THE QUESTION OF, I DO WANNA NOTE THAT WAS ON OUR PREROGATIVE BEFORE ANYBODY ASKED IF WE DID THAT FOR THE PURPOSE OF SAVING TREES.
WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS A PROJECT THAT WAS ALREADY APPROVED WHERE THE DEVELOPER HAS ITS HOMES IS COMING FORTH IN REDUCING THE NUMBER OF LOTS, LOTS, MAINTAINING THE NUMBER OF TREES ON A PRORATED BASIS AND INCREASING THE GREEN SPACE AR AREAS.
AS FAR AS QUANTIFYING IT AS COMPARED TO WHAT THE PRIOR APPROVED PROJECT AND PRIOR DEVELOPER WAS, WE REALLY NEED TO KNOW WHAT THEY WERE GONNA DO WHEN THE DAY DONE WILL BE BETTER THAN THAT.
AND THAT'S WHY WE HAD ASKED AT THE LAST MEETING WHERE SOMEONE JUST GO OUT AND DO ACCOUNT.
[00:45:01]
UH, WHO'S OKAY WITH 60 AND WHO WANTS TO KEEP IT AT 70, I GUESS WHAT'S THE COMBINED CHANGE BETWEEN ITEM SEVEN AND EIGHT? SO THE NUMBER OF TREES IN EIGHT WOULD GO FROM 14 TO 12, THE COMBINED, SO, AND THEN SEVEN, WHAT THEY'RE ASKING WOULD BE 70 TO 60, SO THAT'D BE 12 TREES LESS.AND THESE INCREASED BUFFERS HAVE 15 TREES SAVED.
SO MATH CHECKS OUT, NO OFFENSE, BUT NOT SUPER, I MEAN, BETTER BE APPROVED.
THE TWO PIECES THAT I WANTED WAS TO GO OUT AND SEE IT AND THAT LIKE DOESN'T HAVE, AND TO CONFIRM THAT THEY'RE NOT GONNA JUST CLEAR THE LOT.
MY SECOND WAS SOMEONE TO GO OUT COUNT AND WE'VE GOTTEN KIND OF HIS BACK OF AN NAPKIN ESTIMATE THERE, BUT I, ALL RIGHT.
I DON'T FEEL LIKE I GOT THE INFORMATION I ASKED FOR IS MY COMMENT.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THAT? BECAUSE PEOPLE WOULD WANNA WEIGH IN ON IT ALL JUST IS SEVEN ASIDE THEN AND MOVE ON TO EIGHT.
UM, I TAKE THE CHANGE IN EIGHT THAT I THINK WE WERE GONNA GO WITH.
IT SAID PLANTING A NATIVE MIXTURE OF 14 TREES, A MINIMUM FOUR INCH CALIPER OR EQUIVALENT OF CONIFEROUS TREES WITH SURVIVABILITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH TOWN LAW.
SO I THINK THE FOUR INCH CPER TREES ARE NOT GOING TO BE FEASIBLE, BUT THE EIGHT FOOT TALL CONIFEROUS TREES ARE FEASIBLE.
SO I WAS GOING TO CHANGE EIGHT TO PLANTING OF NATIVE MIXTURE OF 14 FEROUS TREES OF A MINIMUM OF EIGHT INCH HEIGHT WITH SURVIVABILITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH TOWN LAW.
EIGHT INCH HEIGHT, EIGHT, UH, EIGHT FOOT HEIGHT, SORRY.
AND I GUESS THERE'S THE NUMBER ON THAT ISSUE TOO, WHICH WE WILL 14 OR 12 DON'T HAVE.
OH, YOU DON'T HAVE THE SECOND PAGE? I DON'T HAVE, SORRY.
CAN'T GET, I'M, I'M HAPPY WITH REPLACING FOUR INCH CPER TREES WITH EIGHT INCH CONIFERS TREES OR EIGHT FOOT CONIFEROUS TREES BECAUSE THAT PROVIDES SCREENING AROUND.
SO THE OTHER ISSUE WITH THE IS THAT THE BUFFER IS NOT CORRECT ON THE ANSWER THE LOG.
SO WHAT THEY'RE GOING ONE AT A TIME.
SO JUST HOPING WE COULD HAVE AN IDEA.
I'M SORRY, BILL, CAN YOU REPEAT THAT NUMBER AGAIN? WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING.
SO, SO WELL THE NUMBER OF TREES, I THINK WE, WE STILL HAVE A BIT IN DOUBT AFTER OUR DISCUSSIONS ON CONDITION NUMBER SEVEN, BUT CHANGING IT TO SAY PLANTING OF A NATIVE MIXTURE OF HOWEVER MANY NUMBER CONIFEROUS TREES OF A MINIMUM OF EIGHT FOOT IN HEIGHT WITH SURVIVABILITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH TOWN LAW.
SO JUST TAKE OUT THE FOUR INCH CALIBER DECIDUOUS TREES BECAUSE THOSE WOULDN'T BE, SO WE'RE TALKING EVERGREENS, THE 14 TREES OF EIGHT FOOT IN HEIGHT EVERGREENS.
SO, AND THE SURVIVABILITY REFERENCES OUR TOWN LAW REQUIRES THAT THEY SURVIVE FOR, I THINK IT'S THREE TO FIVE YEARS THAT THEY HAVE TO BE REPLANTED.
RIGHT? WELL FOR, FOR 14 OR 12, THEY ORIGINALLY IT WAS ONE PER LOT, THEY GOT TWO LESS LOTS PLANT, TWO LESS TREES.
SIMILAR TO THE WAY THAT THE OTHER ONE WHERE IT WAS FIVE PER LOT.
THEY'RE GONNA DO 10 LESS TREES.
SO WHEN YOU TIE THOSE TOGETHER, IF I CAN GO BACK TO SEVEN, I'M IN SUPPORT OF THE 60 TREES WITH THE MINIMUM OF TWO INCH CALIBER.
I, I'M IN FAVOR OF SEVEN AND I'M IN FAVOR OF YOUR PROPOSAL FOR EIGHT.
FOR THE 12 EIGHT FOOT EVERGREENS.
SO YOU'RE OKAY WITH 60 AND 12.
UM, WE WILL MOVE ON TO NUMBER NINE BEFORE I START PUTTING PEOPLE ON THE SPOT ABOUT A NUMBER FOR TREES.
SO WHAT'S IT, WHAT'S THE EXISTING NINE WAS A 10 FOOT VEGETATIVE BUFFER CONSERVATION EASEMENT WILL BE PLACED ON THE EAST ENDS OF LOT FOUR, SIX, AND SEVEN.
[00:50:01]
GONNA BE, I THINK THE LOTS NUMBERS HAVE CHANGED AND THE SIZE HAS CHANGED, CORRECT? LOTS.SO NOW THEY'RE THREE, FOUR, AND FIVE.
YEAH, THE LOT NUMBER HAS CHANGED.
THEY'RE THREE, FOUR AND FIVE SPECIFICALLY WHEN YOU SPEAK TO A 10 FOOT BUFFER, IT'S FOUR AND FIVE.
THE, THE LOT THREE ALWAYS HAD A DEEPER BUFFER BECAUSE IT, IT PASSED THE POND.
OKAY, SO ON THAT THIS AREA HERE HAD A 10 FOOT BUFFER.
AND WHAT'S THE BUFFER NOW? AND WE DOUBLED IT TO 20 FEET.
AS, AS YOU KNOW, I, I THINK THE WAY TO SAY IT'D BE PERFECT AND WE DID THAT ON OUR OWN FOR RIGHT.
SO THEN, WHICH I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH THOSE CHANGES.
UM, SO NUMBER THREE IS GONNA BE STILL 10 FEET, BUT FOUR AND FIVE ARE GONNA, UH, THREE IS, IS, UM, I THOUGHT IT WAS SPELLED OUT.
IT WENT FROM 75 TO 85 TO PLUS 10.
FOUR AND FIVE WENT FROM 10 TO 20.
85 FEES THREE IS 8 85 FEE INVESTMENT.
AND I, I NOTICED IN LOOKING AT THIS, WE DIDN'T HAVE A CONDITION ON THE OTHER SIDE.
ONE AND TWO HAVE HOW MUCH OF A BUFFER? UM, LOTS.
THAT BUFFER, UM, INCREASED FROM 60 FEET TO 80 FEET.
SO LET'S MAKE SURE WE GET THAT IN THERE.
HOW MANY TREES DO YOU THINK SHOULD BE IN THAT CONDITION? THREE, FOUR, AND FIVE? UM, NO FOR, FOR ITEM NUMBER SEVEN.
MANNING OF NATIVE MIXTURE OF TREES.
ORIGINALLY WE ASKED FOR 70 WHEN THEY HAD 14 LOTS.
WE ALLOW THEM TO PLANT JUST 60.
YOU KNOW THE PROBLEM WITH 60 RIGHT? KAYLIN? I'M GONNA SAY 70 'CAUSE I DIDN'T GET THE INFORMATION I ASKED FOR.
SO WE KEEP A TAB AND BUILD 60, CINDY'S ALREADY SAID 60.
I'M OKAY WITH 60 ALSO BECAUSE, SO 60 TO 12, RIGHT.
72 THAT WE'RE NOW GOING BE REQUIRING 'EM TO PLANT.
PLUS THEY'RE STATING THAT THERE'S AN ADDITIONAL 15 THAT'S GOING TO BE SAVED BY INCREASING THESE THREE BUFFERS, WHICH IS 97, WHICH IS MORE THAN THE ORIGINAL REQUIREMENT FOR PLANTING.
PLUS YOU ALSO HAVE THESE THREE OTHER LOTS THAT WERE JUST INCREASED THE BUFFER AS WELL TOO.
SO WE'RE ACTUALLY WITH THIS PLANT HAVING MORE TREES THAT ARE GOING TO BE PLANTED AND SAFE.
SO JUST FOR THE SAKE OF CLARITY, ANYBODY WHO SAID THEY WERE OKAY WITH 60, ARE THEY ALSO, ARE THOSE INDIVIDUALS ALSO OKAY WITH 12? YES.
UM, AND YOU ADDED IN THE ADDITIONAL EASEMENT REQUIREMENTS AS NEW CONDITION FOR THE LAST TIME, CORRECT? YES.
THINK I I GOT A PLAN FOR THAT.
OKAY, WHAT WAS THE QUESTION? THE BUFFERS? I'M GONNA, I CAN START WITH THE SEEKER BEFORE I DO THE SECOND MAN, RIGHT? BECAUSE THAT ONE'S GONNA BE EASIER.
SEEKER IN ACCORDANCE WITH NEW YORK STATE SEEKER LAW, THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD HAS REVIEWED THE 12 LOT SUBDIVISION PROPOSED BY ESSEX HOMES TO BE LOCATED AT NILES AVENUE.
THIS IS A REVISED PRELIMINARY PLAT WHICH HAS RESULTED IN THE REDUCTION OF PROPOSED LOTS.
THE PLANNING BOARD HAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED THIS SUBDIVISION AND THIS REDUCTION IN LOTS REDUCES THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS BASED ON THE PRELIMINARY PLAT REVIEW OF THE SUBMITTED MATERIALS AND INPUT FROM OTHER DEPARTMENTS.
AND A THOROUGH ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS UTILIZING PART TWO OF THE EAF AND MATERIALS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT AND ANALYZED IN PART THREE OF THE EAF FROM THE
[00:55:01]
PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PROJECT.THE PLANNING BOARD HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION DOES NOT ANTICIPATE TO RESULT IN ANY SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND THAT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS HEREBY ISSUED AND THAT THE PLANNING BOARD CHAIRMAN IS AUTHORIZED TO SIGN THE EAF, WHICH WILL ACT AS THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION.
SO THAT AS A MOTION BY BILL SECOND BY SECOND.
TAMMY, WHAT'S THE DATE THAT YOU'RE LETTER THIS ONE? NINE 15.
THE LINK THAT CAME OUT FROM YOUR, UH, ADMIN ON ENGINEER DEPARTMENT.
THOSES DIDN'T WORK IF YOU WEREN'T A ACCOUNT ED EMPLOYEE, SO I COULDN'T OPEN UP MAINTAIN.
YEAH, SO I DON'T KNOW IF WE NEED TO LINK IN A DIFFERENT WAY.
WE TRIED TO DO IT TOO SINCE SHE DID A DIFFERENT WAY AND THEN WE COULD GET IT.
OKAY, SO THERE'S, THERE IS A WAY TO, SO YEAH, WE CAN TALK TO HER.
SO THIS IS THE SITE PLAN CONDITION, WHEREAS THE TOWN OF HAMBURG RECEIVED THE SUBDIVISION APPLICANT FROM APPLICATION FROM ESSEX HOMES FOR THE DEVELOPMENT IN THE 12 SUBDIVISION ON NILES A.
AND WHEREAS HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD REVIEWED THE APPLICATION AND REVISIONS TO THE APPLICATION AT MEETINGS FROM OCTOBER OF 2022 TO SEPTEMBER OF 2023.
AND WHEREAS THE HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD HAS REVIEWED THE PROJECT AND DETERMINED THAT THE PROJECT WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE NATURAL RESOURCES OF THE STATE AND OR THE HEALTH SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC AND IS CONSISTENT WITH SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS.
AND THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION WAS ISSUED BY THE PLANNING BOARD AND WHEREAS THE HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD HELD THE REQUIRED PUBLIC HEARING OF 9 20 20 23 AND RECEIVED COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC.
AND WHEREAS THE HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD HAS REVIEWED THE PROJECT AGAINST THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SUBDIVISION ZONING AND WETLANDS PROTECTION LAWS AND FOUND THE PROJECT TO BE ACCORDANCE WITH THOSE LAWS, NOTING THAT THE NON-JURISDICTIONAL WETLANDS ON THE SITE ARE NOT QUALITY WETLANDS AND THAT THE UNIQUENESS OF THE SITE DOES NOT ALLOW FOR THEIR AVOIDANCE.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD HEREBY ISSUES PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION APPROVAL WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS.
ONE APPROVAL IS CONTINGENT UPON THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT COMMENT LETTER DATED SEPTEMBER 15TH.
TWO RECREATION FEES IN LIEU OF LAND WILL BE REQUIRED AS THERE IS NO APPROPRIATE PLACE TO LOCATE A NEW FACILITY.
THE CONSTRUCTION OF SIDEWALKS SHALL NOT BE WAIVED IN THAT THEY WILL BE CONSTRUCTED ON THE ENTIRETY OF NILES AVENUE AS ILLUSTRATED ON THE APPROVED PLANS.
FOUR DEED RESTRICTIONS TO BE PUT IN PLACE ON THE REAR OF THE DEEP LOTS TO RESTRICT DEVELOPMENTS OF THOSE LOTS.
FIVE STORM WATER MANAGEMENT AREA WILL BE PLACED ON ITS OWN LOT OWNED BY A HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION AND IT WILL BE RESTRICTED AS PERMANENT OPEN SPACE AND WILL PROVIDE THE APPROPRIATE DRAINAGE EASEMENTS TO THE TOWN FOR EMERGENCY REPAIRS.
THE DETENTION BASIN WILL BE OVERSIZED AS PROPOSED BY THE APPLICANT AND APPROVED BY THE TOWN ENGINEER IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE THE REMOVAL OF NON-JURISDICTIONAL WETLANDS AND TO ADDRESS THE EXISTING WET CONDITIONS.
THE PLANTING OF A NATIVE MIXTURE OF 60 TREES OF A MINIMUM OF TWO AND A HALF INCH CALIPER OR EQUIVALENT OF CONIFEROUS TREES WITH SURVIVABILITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TOWN LAW.
THE ADDITIONAL PLANTING OF A NATIVE MIXTURE OF 12 CONFERS TREES OF A MINIMUM OF EIGHT FEET IN HEIGHT WITH SURVIVABILITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TOWN LAW.
A VEGETATED BUFFER IN CONSERVATION EASEMENT WILL BE PLACED ON THE FALL ON SPECIFIC LOTS AS FOLLOWED LOTS ONE AND TWO.
THE WEST END OF LOTS ONE AND TWO WILL HAVE AN 80 FOOT BUFFER IN CONSERVATION EASEMENT.
THE EAST END OF LOT THREE WILL HAVE AN 85 FOOT BUFFER CONSERVATION EASEMENT AND THE EAST ENDS OF LOTS FOUR AND FIVE WILL HAVE A 20 FOOT VEGETATED BUFFER CONSERVATION EASEMENT CONDITION.
THE DEVELOPER, THE DEVELOPER WILL MAKE EVERY EFFORT TO PRESERVE EXISTING SIGNIFICANT TREES.
USE THAT'S ABOUT ONE OF YOUR CONDITIONS.
THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT DOESN'T DE RESTRICTED EASEMENT.
THAT'S WHY THAT REQUIRES, THAT REQUIRES SOME SORT OF A, THAT'S NOT JUST THAT THEY'RE SAYING THEY'RE GONNA DO IT, THAT THEY'LL EITHER BE DEEP
[01:00:01]
RESTRICTED OR OTHERWISE FILED.SO YOU KNOW WHAT I'LL DO? I'M GONNA CLARIFY NUMBER FOUR DEED RESTRICTIONS TO BE PUT IN PLACE ON THE REAR END OF THE DEEP LOTS TO RESTRICT DEVELOPMENTS ON THOSE LOTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIRED VEGETATIVE BUFFER AND CONSERVATION EASEMENTS OUTLINED IN CONDITION NINE WOULD ASK FOR, AND I'VE DONE THIS IN THE PAST ON NUMBER 10 IT SAID THE DEVELOPER WILL MAKE EVERY EFFORT TO PRESERVE A GOOD THING SIGNIFICANT TREES.
I DON'T LIKE PUTTING THAT PRESSURE ON THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT OR OTHER SO AND SAY IN ACCORDANCE WITH AN APPROVED CLEARING PLAN THAT THEY SHOW A CLEARING PLAN AND THAT THEY NEED THAT CLEARING PLAN.
WE HAVE SOMETHING SIGNIFICANT TO WORK ON AND NOT JUST TELL THE BUILDING INSPECTORS SUPPOSED TO MINIMIZE TREE LOCK.
ALRIGHT, SO WE'LL, WE'LL, WE'LL AMEN.
THE DEVELOPER WILL SUBMIT A TREE CLEARING PLAN TO THE TOWN OF HAMBURG CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICE AND THE TOWN OF HAMBURG AND THE ENGINEERING OFFICE.
THE ENGINEER SHOULD BE THE ENGINEERING OFFICE.
TO THE TOWN OF HAMBURG ENGINEERING OFFICE AND TO THE TOWN OF HAMBURG CONSERVATION ADVISORY BOARD FOR APPROVAL.
AND THAT CAN BE DONE ON A PER LOT BASIS, RIGHT? YES, THAT'LL HELP WITH THAT.
ALRIGHT, SO IT IS AT THE TIME OF CONSTRUCTION.
AT THE TIME OF CONSTRUCTION AT THE TIME, YEAH.
WHEN YOU'RE GETTING YOUR BUILDING PERMIT, I HAVE TO GO ALONG WITH THAT.
THEY'LL FIRST GET A PIT PERMIT, THEY'LL PUT THE ROAD IN AND THEY'LL SHOW A CLEARING PLAN FOR THAT.
AND THEN FOR EACH LINE AS THEY DEVELOP IT, SX WOULD DO THIS AND SOMETIMES THEY'LL SELL IT TO ANOTHER HOME BUILDER AND AT LEAST HAVE THE IDEA THAT THIS HAS TO BE PRESERVED.
I SO THERE'S FOR CLARITY SAKE FOR THE RECORD, FOR THE FOREPERSON THAT HAS TO TYPE THIS UP, SORRY.
SARAH
AND THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT CAN PROVIDE A LETTER WITH ALL OF THESE
YEAH, WELL THEY CAN GET THE RESOLUTION TOO.
SO, ALL RIGHT, SO THAT IS A MOTION BY BILL SECOND BY CINDY.
SO ALL IN FAVOR? OPPOSED? NONE.
UH, TAKE A MOMENT TO SAY, UM, THANK, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
TWO, TWO QUESTIONS AND ONE CLARIFICATION, I'LL BE VERY QUICK IF POSSIBLE, GET A COPY OF THE ENGINEERING LETTER OF SEPTEMBER 15TH.
UM,
UM, AND I BELIEVE THAT THAT, UH, MS. MCCORMICK'S COMMENTS ARE, ARE VERY GOOD ONES AND CONCERNS ARE VERY GOOD ONES.
AND YOU WANNA RECOGNIZE THOSE.
I WANTED TO SAY THAT IT'S NOT ONLY MY JOB AT ESSEX HOMES AS THE LAND DEVELOPMENT PERSON GET PROJECTS APPROVED, BUT BUILD VERY GOOD PROJECTS.
AND I THINK THAT WE SEE EYE, EYE TO EYE ON ON THOSE THINGS.
UM, THE, THE TESTIMONY I GAVE WAS IN THOSE PRESERVE AREAS THAT WE EXTENDED PLUS 10 PLUS 15, THE MATH ON A PER PER PRO RATE OF BASIS WAS MINUS 12.
THAT WOULD PUT US STILL PLUS THREE.
WHAT'S NOT ACCOUNTED FOR IN THERE IS AREAS HERE THAT WOULD LIKELY PRESERVE MORE SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONAL PRESERVED TREES IN THESE AREAS.
SO I BELIEVE THAT IN ESSENCE, THE PRESERVED TREES WILL BE WELL IN EXCESS OF, OF THAT MATHEMATICAL FORMULA WE DID AT THAT TIME.
OF COURSE, WE CAN'T ANSWER IT FULLY BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT ACTS THE OTHER CONDITION WAS.
BUT I DO WANT TO POINT OUT, I THINK WE SHARE THE SAME VALUES AND, UM, UH, WE LOOK FORWARD TO CONTINUING
WE'RE GONNA DO VERY WELL WITH THIS.
NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS BELL ATLANTIC MOBILE SYSTEMS, LLC REISSUING SITE PLAN APPROVAL ON A PROPOSAL TO INSTALL AND OPERATE A WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY ON TO A REPLACEMENT UTILITY POLE
[01:05:01]
NEAR 5 6 0 0 MCKINLEY PARKWAY.WE ARE BILLED FOR THE RECORD WITH DIRECTION AND ERROR WITH UNKNOWN TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT THAT THIS MET THE CRITERIA FOR 2 39 REFERRAL TO THE COUNTY.
THE APPLICANT HAS ASKED THE APPLICANT ATTORNEY THAT WE REAPPROVED THE PROJECT BECAUSE THAT IS AN ERROR NOT DOING 2 39 REFERRAL.
WE SENT THE REFERRAL TO THE COUNTY, JOSH, WE GOT A RESPONSE.
SO JUST REISSUED THE EXACT SAME APPROVALS THE APPLICANT HAS ASKED US TO DO THIS, THE COVER OF THE PROCEDURAL ERROR THAT WAS MADE BECAUSE WE DID NOT DO A COUNTY REFERRAL.
OH, THAT'S WHY I NEEDED THE REFERRAL.
IT'S SO MANY FEET OF A STATE OF A MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY OF A STATE HIGHWAY.
IT WASN'T THERE, BUT WE WE FORGOT THAT THE PROPERTY, IT IS A COUNTY ONLY PROPERTY.
THEY WERE, THEY'RE REPLACING AN EXISTING POLE.
AND THE REASON THEY HAD TO COME TO US IS BECAUSE IF IT'S A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF FEET HIGHER THAN THE EXISTING POLE, THE MEET OUR, WE APPROVE IT AND THEY WERE OVER BY JUST A FEW INCHES.
THE MEET OUR LAW, THEY HAD TO GET THIS APPROVAL.
AGAIN, WE'RE JUST ASKING YOU TO PASS THE EXACT EXACT SAME RESOLUTION.
IT'S JUST SO WE, WE FIXED THE ERROR OF DOING A 2 39 REFERRAL.
THE APPLICANT'S ATTORNEY WOULD LOVE US TO REISSUE THE APPROVALS AFTER THE 2 39 REFERRAL WAS COMPLETED.
AND THIS IS, UH, THOSE APPROVAL WE WERE HERE.
UM, ANY, ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? ANY COMMENTS BEFORE WE GO INTO THE RESOLUTION? NO, NO, NO.
WHEREAS THE TOWN OF HAMBURG RECEIVED A SITE PLAN APPLICATION FROM BELL ATLANTIC MOBILE SYSTEMS LLC TO INSTALL AND OPERATE A TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY NEAR 5 6 0 0 MCKINLEY PARKWAY, HAMBURG FAIRGROUNDS.
AND WHEREAS THE HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD HELD THE REQUIRED PUBLIC HEARING AND RECEIVED COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC, AND WHEREAS THE HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD IN ACCORDANCE WITH NEW YORK STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW ACT HAS DONE A THOROUGH REVIEW OF THE PROJECT AND ITS POTENTIAL IMPACTS IN COMPLETING PART TWO AND THREE OF THE FEAF.
AND WHEREAS THE HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD IN ACCORDANCE WITH SEEKER HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN APPROVAL AND INSTALLATION AND OPERATION OF THE TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITY WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE NATURAL RESOURCES OF THE STATE AND OR THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC AND IS CONSISTENT WITH SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS.
NOW THEREFORE BE RESOLVED THAT THE HAM PLANNING BOARD HEREBY DETERMINES THAT THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN APPROVAL AND INSTALLATION AND OPERATION OF THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES IS NOT ANTICIPATED TO RESULT IN ANY SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT.
AND THAT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS HEREBY ISSUED AND THAT THE PLANNING BOARD CHAIRMAN IS AUTHORIZED TO SIGN THE EAF, WHICH WILL ACT AS THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION SETS A MOTION BY BILL SECOND BY SECOND.
HOPEFULLY WE LEAVE THE NEXT ONE.
AND YOU HAVE PARTS TWO AND THREE DIRECT
TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD HEREBY GRANT SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR THE BELL ATLANTIC MOBILE SYSTEMS LLC TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROJECT TO BE LOCATED NEAR 5 6 0 0 MCKINLEY PARKWAY WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS.
ONE, THE OWNER WILL ALLOW OTHER USERS ON THE POLL IF POSSIBLE.
THE PLANNING BOARD WAIVES THE INSTALLATION OF SIDEWALKS
UH, IT'S A MOTION BY BILL SECOND BY SECOND.
SO NEXT YEAR AT THE FAIR, WE SHOULD HAVE BETTER SETTLE UP.
THIRD ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS JEFFREY ZIMMER REQUESTING REZONING OF PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF ABBOTT ROAD AND MILES STRIPPED FROM R TWO TO C ONE.
SO THIS IS ON THE BORDER OF FORTUNE PARK.
ACROSS THE STREET IS THE JEWELERS ZONE C ONE.
THIS IS THE ONE THAT HAS THE HOUSE AND THE SIDEWALK KIND OF GOES INTO THE GRASS.
RIGHT? THERE'S ACTUALLY ABOUT SIX.
I'M JEFF PALUMBO WITH BLACK LONGO, THE ATTORNEY FOR MR. ZIMMER.
UH, MR. ZIMMER'S IN HONG KONG.
SO AGAIN, HE GIVES HIS BEST WISHES TO ALL OF YOU WISHES HE COULD BE HERE.
AS YOU'VE INDICATED, THE PROPERTY ACROSS THE STREET WAS DEVELOPED BY MR. ZIMMER IN THE TOWN OF ORCHARD PARK.
QUITE A REZONING THERE AND A SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR THE REEDS GEN STORE.
WE ENVISION THE SAME TYPE OF THING FOR THE HAMBURG SIDE OF THE STREET
[01:10:01]
ON ABBOTT.AND HE HAS ASSEMBLED THOSE SIX PARCELS OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS AND HAS SUBMITTED A ROUGH CONCEPT PLAN TO YOU.
THE REQUEST IS ACTUALLY A REZONING FROM R TWO TO C ONE.
AND WE HAD DISCUSSION AT THE WORK SESSION LAST TIME ABOUT, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL AND WE TOOK A LOOK AT THAT AND DETERMINED THAT IT REALLY WASN'T APPROPRIATE FOR THIS SITE BECAUSE OF THE, UH, SPECIFICATIONS FOR 2000 SQUARE FEET AND 10 PARKING SPACES AND WE'RE AT 28 PARKING SPACES AND, UH, 5,700 SQUARE FEET.
SO AT THIS POINT IN TIME, I COULD NOT TELL YOU EXACTLY THE TENANTS SINCE WE DON'T EVEN HAVE THE REZONING YET.
BUT AS WE INDICATED IN THE WORK SESSION, WE'RE THINKING ALONG THE LINES OF A, UM, KIND OF A MIXED USE BUILDING, MAYBE A SMALL RESTAURANT TYPE A JUICERY AND SOME TYPE OF RETAIL ON THE PROPERTY.
I THINK WE CAN ALL AGREE THAT OUR TWO PRESENT ZONING IS NOT APPROPRIATE FOR THE SITE AND WE THINK THAT THIS MIGHT ACT AS A, UH, INCENTIVE TO CONTINUE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT ALONG ABBOTT TO MATCH THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STREET.
SO WITH THAT, I WOULD ASK FOR A RECOMMENDATION TO THE TOWN BOARD AND HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE.
WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY MIXED USE? MIXED USE MEANING RETAIL, UM, AND, AND RESTAURANT RATHER THAN NOT RESIDENTIAL.
RIGHT? NOT IN THE STRICT MIXED USE RESIDENTIAL TERMS. AND WHAT KIND OF RESTAURANTS AGAIN, WE'RE, WE, WE DON'T KNOW YET, BUT WE'RE, WE'RE THINKING IT WON'T BE A CHICK-FIL-A OR A POPEYE'S OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
IT'S JUST NOT, JUST NOT THE RIGHT PLACE FOR IT.
BUT SOMETHING LIKE A JUICERY, UM, SOMETHING LIKE A SMALL BREAKFAST PLACE IS WHAT WE MIGHT, MIGHT SEE THERE.
IT'S NOT GONNA BE A RESTAURANT BAR? NO.
NO, I MEAN MY THOUGHT IS IS THAT IF THEY DON'T FEEL LIKE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL WORKS FOR 'EM IS THAT I THINK WE SHOULD TAKE A HARD LOOK AT WHAT THE PERMITTED USES ARE UNDER C ONE.
THEY, BECAUSE SOME OF THOSE, I MEAN THAT LOT IS JUST NOT BIG ENOUGH AND THERE'S PEOPLE RIGHT THERE.
AND IF THE USE, I GUESS THIS IS A QUESTION FOR YOU OR FOR THE ATTORNEY.
CAN WE PUT A CONDITION ON OUR OUR OR CAN WE RECOMMEND A CONDITION THAT WOULD REQUIRE ANY COMMERCIAL USE THAT GOES IN TO BE PUTTING FENCING BETWEEN IT AND THE ADJACENT RESIDENTIALS? IS THAT ALLOWABLE OR IS THAT SOMETHING WE WOULD'VE TO DO AT SITE PLAN SITE? WE DO TO SITE IN, BUT WE DON'T HAVE, BUT WE CAN PUT IT IN OUR MEMO SO EVERYONE KNOWS THAT THAT'S WHAT WE'D ASK.
REASONABLE REQUEST FOR CONDITION.
A LOT OF TIMES I'VE SEEN THAT ADDITIONAL
THEN IT MIGHT COME IF THE REZONING WAS APPROVED, THAT CONDITION, THEN THE BILL SAYS THE SITE PLAN APPROVAL WOULD CONFORM TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT CONDITION IS MET.
BUT THAT'S A REASONABLE CONDITION.
IT'S A, WE DON'T, IT IS ATTACHED TO A A, A PROBLEM, WHICH IS THE ADJOINING PROPERTIES ARE RESIDENTIAL.
SO, UM, AND I JUST WANTED TO NOTE ON THE RECORD WE STARTED THAT PLAN.
THE CONFERENCE PLAN GIVES A LITTLE BIT OF DIRECTION FOR THIS AREA.
IT DOES SAY THE TOWN SHOULD INVESTIGATE AND WORK WITH THE TOWN OF ORCHARD PARK AND TRYING TO MAKE A PLAN THAT WORKS AND NOT HAVE, YOU KNOW, EACH SIDE OF THE STREET HAVING DIFFERENT ZONINGS AND WHATEVER.
IT DOESN'T SAY CLEARLY IT SHOULD BE THIS ZONE OR THIS ZONE.
IT SAYS THE TOWN SHOULD INVESTIGATE, WHICH IS YOU'RE KIND OF DOING RIGHT NOW, INVESTIGATING THE FACT OF HOW CAN WE MAKE THIS AREA WORK BETTER?
MOSTLY THE COMMERCIAL IS ON AND THEN IT'S NOTED ON THE ORCHARD PARK SIDE, ON THE TOWN DOWNSIDE IT'S MOSTLY RESIDENTIAL AND DOWN THAT SIDE STREET IT'S MOSTLY RESIDENTIAL.
SO WHATEVER YOU DO, YOU SHOULD HAVE SOME PROTECTION TO THOSE ADJOINING RESIDENTIAL AREAS.
UM, SO AGAIN, THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE DOING, PUTTING A REPORT TOGETHER IN YOUR RECOMMENDATION TO SAY, OKAY, IF YOU'RE GOING THE ROUTE OF RECOMMENDING THE C ONE, WOULD THERE BE CONDITIONS PLACED? AND WHAT ARE THE CONCERNS? I KNOW DENNIS HAD CONCERNS, OTHERS HAVE CONCERNS.
WHAT ARE THOSE CONCERNS AGAIN, IT'S THE, ULTIMATELY IT'S THE TOWN BOARD DECISION AFTER THEY HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING, CAN NO DRIVERS BE A CONDITION? I ALREADY WROTE IT DOWN, SO, OKAY.
AND THEN THE OTHER THING I WOULD JUST NOTE ON THE RECORD IS THAT THIS IS OBVIOUSLY WITHIN 500 FEET OF AN OUR DISTRICT BOUNDARY.
SO THERE'S NO ALCOHOL SALES ALLOWED ON THE PREMISES WOULD BE ALLOWED.
SO I JUST WOULD REITERATE THAT ESPECIALLY WITH PEOPLE THERE PROXIMITY TO THE STADIUM.
IMAGINE THAT PEOPLE EVEN PUT THAT AS A CONDITION.
THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO GET A VARIANCE, WHICH WE HAVE GIVEN THE VARIANCES IN THE PAST, BUT YOU COULD AS A CONDITION THAT THERE'D BE NO ALCOHOL SALES.
YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO HAVE ALCOHOLS SALES.
SO ARE WE ALL IN AGREEMENT THAT THIS SHOULD NOT REMAIN ZONED RESIDENTIAL? YES.
ALRIGHT, SO WHY DON'T WE JUST GO THROUGH PIECE BY PIECE.
[01:15:01]
BUILDING, WE GO I ZONE COMMERCIAL I GUESS IS WHAT I WOULD SAY.SAY LET'S GO PIECE BY PIECE THROUGH C ONE.
WE OKAY WITH RETAIL SALES BEING THERE? YES.
UH, B WHAT'S THAT? A COLD SHOP QUI SHOP.
UH, UM, YEAH, FOR THE COLD GAMES RIGHT.
YOU DON'T THINK A DRY CLEANING ESTABLISHMENT THROUGH THERE? NO.
ANYBODY HAVE A STRONG OPINION THE OTHER DIRECTION? NEUTRAL.
UH, C EATING OR DRINKING ESTABLISHED PROVIDED THAT ANY ENTERTAINMENT SHALL BE LIMITED TO TELEVIS VISION RADIO OR MUSIC.
AND FURTHER PROVIDED THAT NO SALE OF ALCOHOL BEVERAGES FOR CONSUMPTION ON THE PREMISES SHALL BE PERMITTED ON ANY LOT WHERE THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING IS LESS THAN 500 FEET FROM THE SIDE LOT THAT ABUTS ANY R DISTRICT BOUNDARY.
SO I ALREADY PUT NO ALCOHOL SALES.
UM, IS THAT ENOUGH OR IS THERE MORE IN THAT THAT WE'D WANT TO RESTRICT? I WOULD JUST SAY I DON'T KNOW WHICH, BECAUSE OF THE MULTIPLE LOTS THAT I WOULD JUST SAY THAT THAT WHOLE AREA CAN'T HAVE ANY BECAUSE THERE'S LIKE SIX LOTS IN THAT TINY THING AND YES.
THAT WOULD BE MY, YEAH, WE'LL MERGE THOSE LOTS.
IF WE MAKE IT A CONDITION OF THE REZONING, THEN THE SECTION THAT'S REZONED TO ALL THE CONDITIONS THAT APPLY TO THE WHOLE SECTION.
UH, D GARDEN CENTER INDOOR USE ONLY SEE SPECIAL USE PERMITS FOR OUTDOOR DISPLAY AND THEY HAVE A, I MEAN IT'S SMALL BUT I GUESS, I DON'T KNOW.
I GUESS PROBABLY WHAT I MEAN THEY, THEY WOULD NEED A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR AN OUTDOOR DISPLAY.
THEY'RE PROBABLY NOT GONNA GET A SPECIALTIES PERMIT FOR 'CAUSE OF THE SIZE OF LOT.
WE'RE NOT GONNA DO A GARDEN CENTER THOUGH.
THE FLOWER SHOP IS NOT A GARDEN CENTER THOUGH.
I'M NOT, I DON'T THINK IT HAS BE HOTELS OR MOTELS.
SUBJECT TO THE ABOVE RESTRICTIONS ON EATING AND DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS.
WE'RE NOT GONNA, WE'RE FINE WITH NO HOTEL.
BANKS AND DRIVE THROUGH BANKS PROVIDED THAT AT LEAST FIVE RESERVOIR SPACES PROVIDED ON THE LOT FOR EACH DRIVE-IN TELLER'S WINDOW.
SUCH RESERVOIR SPACES SHALL BE EXCLUSIVE OF REQUIRED PARKING SPACES.
SO WE'VE ALREADY SEEN NO DRIVE THROUGH A BANK.
A PROBLEM WITH THE BANK, NOT HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE BANK ACTUALLY DRIVE THROUGH.
WELL A BANK THAT DOESN'T HAVE A DRIVE-THROUGH BECAUSE WE'RE ALREADY SAYING NO DRIVE-THROUGHS SO BANK WILL BE FINE.
SO A BANK WITHOUT A DRIVE, A BANK WITHOUT A DRIVE THROUGH A BANK WITHOUT A DRIVE.
I DON'T THINK YOU'RE GONNA GET A BANK WITHOUT A DRIVE THROUGH.
WELL NO BANK, RACKETBALL CLUBS, SQUASH COURTS, HEALTH SPA AND RELATED FITNESS FACILITY IN THE WORLD.
YOU COULD HAVE A FITNESS, YOU MIGHT, YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO FIT A PICKLEBALL FOR THERE.
YOU COULD DEFINITELY DO A FITNESS FACILITY AS LONG AS THERE WAS OUT THE PARKING.
I MEAN THAT'S THE THING IS YOU, YOU'D HAVE ADEQUATE PARKING AND THAT THAT WOULD BE SITE PLAN THAT WE'D THEN COME SEE US ANYWAY.
SO, ALRIGHT, SO THAT'S, THAT COULD STAY, UM, THE FOLLOWING USES BY SPECIAL PERMITS.
UH, NURSERY SCHOOL AND DAYCARE CENTER? NO, NO, NO.
REALLY? I WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF A DAYCARE AND A NURSERY CENTER TRAFFIC ROAD QUESTION.
WE NEED, THERE IS A DAYCARE CENTER ON CAMP ROAD RIGHT BY THE, ALL THAT.
I DON'T THINK THAT LIKE IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO PUT IT IN THERE, I MEAN I TAKING GROUP FIVE, BUT, ALRIGHT.
I ESPECIALLY WE CAN DO IT AS A CONDITION.
UH, SO YES OR NO? NO, I'D SAY YES, NO.
YOU STILL HAVE ANOTHER CRACK AT IT? ESPECIALLY THIS THREE THAT YES.
OH, THERE'S THREE OF US THAT ARE YES.
I'M MIS UM, SPECIAL USE PERMIT.
THAT, THAT COULD STAY IN THERE.
WE'LL ARGUE ABOUT IT WHEN WE HAVE TO DO THIS MIS I LOOK BACK TO THE GARDEN CENTER.
GARDEN CENTER WITH OUTDOOR DISPLAY STORAGE.
UM, I THINK WE'RE GONNA SAY NO OUTDOOR DISPLAY STORAGE.
WE SAY NO OUTDOOR STORAGE WILL STOP.
[01:20:01]
OR OTHER RIGHT.HARDWARE STORAGE THAT WOULD ADDRESS THE, UH, THE DRIVE THROUGH ISSUE TOO.
UM, ACCESSORIES, USES AND STRUCTURES.
SO THEY'RE NOT GONNA DEAL WITH THAT.
ONE AWFUL LOT OF USES IN THE C DISTRICT AND HC DISTRICT THIS AS WELL.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL IS ALL SMALLER USES, SO I'M LESS WORRIED ABOUT IT'S HC GROUP.
WHAT IS HC? WHAT'S THAT? HC IS COMMERCIAL.
A LITTLE NEWS DISTRICT THAT WAS CREATED FOR MCKINNEY PARKWAY YEARS AGO AND EVERYBODY DIDN'T LIKE IT.
WELL, WHAT'S HOLD? OKAY, THAT'S TWO 80 DASH 44 1.
I DIDN'T MAKE A COPY OF THAT ONE.
UM, JUST SAY NOT ALLOWING THE USE AS AN HC DISTRICT, MOST OF 'EM ARE COVERED IN THE, IN THE C ONE DISTRICT IS WHAT I'M ASKING.
SO NO, YOU CAN'T SAY THAT IT'S GOING THE OTHER WAY AROUND.
NO, YOU CAN'T, YOU CAN'T SAY THAT.
SO THE HC DISTRICT IS LIMITED RETAIL SALES, NO.
OUTDOOR SALES DISCOUNT STORES, ET CETERA.
OFFICE BUILDINGS, THAT WOULD BE FINE.
FINANCE, INSURANCE, REAL ESTATE, TRAVEL AGENCIES, LEGAL, ENGINEERING, ARCHITECTURAL EDUCATIONAL.
IT WAS A REPLACEMENT TO AN OFFICE DISTRICT.
WE GOT RID OF AN OFFICE THAT THEY'RE GONNA REPLACE IT WITH P ME SPECIALTY FOOD SHOPS, UH, SIX AS TRUCK TERMINALS AND DISPATCH AND TRANSFER OFFICES.
SO EVERYTHING ON HC SEEMS, I THINK EVERYTHING ON N ALL RIGHT.
SO WHAT WE'LL DO IS WE'RE GONNA DO A MEMO RECOMMENDING THAT THE TOWN BOARD REZONE THIS PROPERTY FROM R TWO TO C ONE WITH CONDITIONS, ONE CONDITION BEING FENCE BETWEEN THE C ONE DISTRICT AND THE ADJOINING RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES.
TWO WILL BE A LIST OF USES THAT ARE NOT PERMITTED AS A CONDITION OF THE REZONING THAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING.
NO DRIVE-THROUGHS, NO ALCOHOL SALES, NO OUTDOOR STORAGE, UH, NO DRY CLEANING FACILITIES AND NO HOTELS OR MOTELS.
SO THE OTHER THING I WOULD SAY IS THAT THE C ONE ZONING DISTRICT REQUIRES FOR SIDE YARDS OF BUDDING IN OUR DISTRICT, THAT THEY BE NOT LESS THAN 40 FEET OF A SIDE YARD.
AND I WOULD JUST SAY THAT WELL, THAT THAT'S GONNA STILL APPLY.
SO UNLESS THEY GET A VARIANCE, WELL, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S WORTH US NOTING IN THE RECOMMENDATION THAT IT WOULD, I THINK I WOULD WANNA SEE THE SITE PLAN TO UNDERSTAND THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE PROPOSED VARIANCE VERSUS TRYING TO HANDCUFF IT AT THIS POINT.
AGREE WHAT THE, UH, ZONING BOARD HAS BEEN DOING IN SOME OF THOSE CASES.
LIKE WITH ASPEN DENTAL, IF IT'S SOMETHING THEY THINK WE WOULD HAVE AN ISSUE WITH, THEY REFER IT TO US.
WELL, WE HAVE TO REFER TO THE ZBA A SO, EW, YOU WEREN'T AT OUR TRAINING.
SO JEFF
SO WE'RE GONNA GET IT FIRST AND THEN YES.
INSTEAD OF THEM GETTING IT FIRST AND SENDING IT TO US.
I WOULDN'T WANNA PUT IT AS A CONDITION AT THIS POINT WITHOUT KNOWING HOW THE ACTUAL SITE'S GOING TO BE LAID OUT.
WELL, IT'S ALREADY IN THE LAW, RIGHT? I'M JUST SAYING LIKE THE VARIANCE THERE COULD BE, YOU KNOW, THERE COULD BE A REASON TO SAY YES AND THERE MIGHT BE A REASON TO SAY NO.
YOU CHANGE WHAT? FENCE TO A PRIVACY FENCE.
AND BY THE WAY, BILL, YOU SAY MEMO, BUT WE'RE GONNA TAKE ALL WHAT YOU SAY AND INCORPORATE IT IN THIS REZONING REPORT, WHICH ALSO ATTACHES THE MEANING WE'RE TRYING TO STANDARDIZE OKAY.
SO IT JUST, SO WE'RE GONNA MEMO AND WE'RE GONNA TAKE, WE'RE GONNA PUT THIS ALL WHAT YOU SAID TONIGHT IN THIS REPORT.
BECAUSE IT SAYS REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION.
WE TRY TO STANDARDIZE THE REPORT.
AND, AND HOW ARE WE DOING THAT? ARE WE GETTING THE REPORT AND VOTING ON IT OR ARE WE VOTING ON IT NOW? ARE WE VOTING ON IT OUT? I'M JUST GONNA INCORPORATE, JUST GET REPORT AND IF WE WEREN AND ATTACH YOUR MEETING MINUTES.
NO ONE THINKS WE MADE ANY CHANGES TO IT.
SO I'M GONNA MAKE A MOTION TO AUTHORIZE THE DRAFT OF REPORT TO SEND TO THE TOWN BOARD ON THE REZONING WITH THE CONDITIONS THAT WE'VE DISCUSSED AND THAT THE REPORT WOULD RECOMMEND THE REZONING.
JUST TO LET YOU KNOW, UM, I DON'T KNOW IF WE'LL HAVE TIME TO GET THIS ON LAURA PLAN, HAVE I MAY KNOW MONDAY
[01:25:02]
DEADLINE IS NOON TOMORROW AND WE HAVE ABOUT 20 OTHER THINGS WE HAVE TO DO BEFORE THAT DEADLINE OF TOMORROW.WELL JUST JUMP THIS TO THE FRONT DEAL.
ALL RIGHT, NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS WEST AUTOMOTIVE REQUESTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL ON OUR PROPOSING TO DEMOLISH AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY HOME AND TO CONSTRUCT A VEHICLE TOWING LOT ON HALF ACRE AT 3 6 0 0.
MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, ROB BOAN FROM NUS PALMER AND CLARK 3 5 5 6 LAKE SHORE ROAD IN HAMBURG.
AND WITH ME THIS EVENING IS JIM MALKA.
JIM IS THE DIRECTOR OF FACILITY OPERATIONS FOR WESTER.
UM, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS PROJECT QUITE A BIT SINCE MAY.
UM, I THINK YOU FOLKS WERE, SOME OF YOU WERE AT TRAINING LAST MONTH, BUT I DID WANT TO, UH, JUST HIGHLIGHT, I'M GONNA ASK FOR THE LANDSCAPE PLANS PART OF THOSE SET CAMERA.
JOSH, WHEN YOU PULL STUFF UP ON THAT SCREEN, IS THAT WHAT THEY SEE ON FACEBOOK OR NO, NO, NO, NO.
SO THAT SCREEN IS ON FACEBOOK.
IT'D BE NICE IF WE COULD SHARE IT IN SCREEN.
IT WILL BE NICE IF TO SHARE SCREEN, BUT WE WON'T MAKE YOU DO THAT RIGHT NOW.
YEAH, WE HAD, WE HAD TALKED ABOUT, UM, WE HAD TALKED ABOUT INCREASING THE OFFSET BETWEEN THIS HOME AND WHERE THE PARKING LOT STARTED.
WESTER ELIMINATED TWO PARKING SPACES THERE.
WE HAVE 23.8 FEET HERE NOW, BETWEEN WHERE THE HOME IS AND WHERE THE BEGINNING OF THE LOT IS TO PROTECT THE NEIGHBOR ON THIS SIDE OF THE SITE, WE DO HAVE LANDSCAPING ALL IN ADDITION TO AN EIGHT FOOT HIGH STOCK GATE DEFENSE THAT DOES, UH, SENSITIVITY TOWARD OUR NEIGHBOR.
AND, UM, THAT, THAT IS A REQUIREMENT OF FOR THE, UH, SPECIAL USE PERMIT.
SO WE ARE SEEKING YOUR APPROVAL THIS EVENING FOR SITE PLAN AND FOR THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT.
WE DID FILE AN APPLICATION LAST THE END OF LAST MONTH, UH, FOR THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT.
THE SITE IS ZONED G TWO GENERAL COMMERCIAL.
IT IS A TYPE TWO ACTION UNDER SEEKER.
AND ALL I WANTED TO UPDATE YOU ON, IF YOU RECALL, WE WERE WAITING FOR, UM, A RESPONSE FROM THE DOT, WHICH FINALLY DID COME THIS PAST WEEK.
AND, UH, WE HAVE ADDRESSED THE COMMENTS THAT CAME FROM THE DOT.
UM, THEY DIDN'T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THE DRIVEWAY.
I THINK THEY WERE SATISFIED WITH THE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED DRIVEWAY.
THE ONLY THING THEY DID ASK US TO DO WAS TO MODIFY OUR PLAN TO LIMIT THE WATER THAT WE WERE TAKING INTO THE STATE'S, UM, BASIN.
WE HAD ALLOWED THAT TO JUST GO UNRESTRAINED PREVIOUSLY BECAUSE OF THE SIZE OF THE SITE.
THEY'VE ASKED US TO RESTRICT THE OUTLET TO A SIX INCH OUTLET, WHICH WE'VE DONE.
WE'VE MODIFIED OUR PLANS, WE'VE RESUBMITTED ENGINEERING, WE'VE RESUBMITTED TO DOT.
THEY'VE ALREADY DONE A PRELIMINARY REVIEW REVIEW AND LET US KNOW THAT THOSE PLANS ARE IN APPROVABLE FORM.
UM, I DID WANNA CONFIRM, AND I I THINK WE DID THIS LAST MONTH AT THE PUBLIC HEARING, WHICH WAS OPEN AND CLOSED, BUT THE OPERATIONAL HOURS FROM ARE FROM 8:00 AM TO 6:00 PM WE TALKED ABOUT THE OFFSET.
WE DID RECEIVE A RESPONSE FROM THE DOT.
UM, WE ALSO MET ON AUGUST 24TH WITH THE NEIGHBORS WHO WERE HERE.
UM, WE DID FILE A LETTER YESTERDAY, WHICH I THINK ALL THE BOARD MEMBERS HAVE.
UM, THE NEIGHBORS THAT WE MET WITH, THEIR CONCERNS ARE RELATED PRIMARILY TO THINGS THAT HAVE EXISTED IN THE AREA FOR QUITE A WHILE NOW.
THE TRAFFIC, THE, UM, YOU KNOW, THE DRAINAGE CONCERNS.
UM, I DID WANNA ALSO, UH, MENTION THAT, YOU KNOW, WE HAD DEVELOPED THIS MAP HERE WAS AN OVERALL PLAN THAT SHOWED ALL OF THE AREAS THAT WERE PUT HERE TO THIS DITCH.
THE STITCHES HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW THAT GOES DOWN AND ACTUALLY CONNECTS WITH A, WITH A CREEK BACK
[01:30:01]
THERE.SO WE'RE RESTRICTING THE FLOW COMING OUT OF THE LOT.
DOT HAS ALREADY MADE SOME IMPROVEMENTS TO THEIR OUT BALL STRUCTURE TO THAT DIG.
AND IT INDICATED IN THEIR CORRESPONDENCE TO US THAT THEY'VE IMPROVED THE SITUATION WITH THAT EXISTING DITCH BECAUSE OF MODIFICATIONS THEY'VE MADE TO THEIR OUTFALL STRUCTURE.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, DOT IS GONE.
OUR PROJECT IS, YOU KNOW, UH, VERY SMALL COMPARED TO, UH, WHAT IS ALREADY THERE.
AND, UH, AGAIN, DOT WENT ON RECORD AS SAYING THAT THEY'VE, UH, I I JUST WOULD LIKE TO READ.
THEY'VE ASKED WEST HER TO DOWNSIZE THE OUTLET TO SIX INCH.
THERE HAVE BEEN FLOODING ISSUES DOWNSTREAM ON A COUPLE OF PROPERTIES ON OREGON ROAD IN THE PAST.
THE FLOODING HAS SINCE BEEN RE REMEDIATED AFTER ALTERING THE OUTLET STRUCTURE TO THE POND.
BUT WE WANNA AVOID ANY FUTURE ISSUES.
SO THE PLAN HAS BEEN MODIFIED TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THEIR REQUESTS AND, UM, I THINK, YEAH.
CAN YOU JUST STEP BACK? SO, BECAUSE I HAD SOMEONE FROM THE PUBLIC MENTION TO ME THAT THERE WAS A PROBLEM WITH DO T'S STORMWATER POND AND THAT IT WASN'T FUNCTIONING PROPERLY.
AND IT SOUNDS LIKE DOT HAS COME IN TO DO SOMETHING ALREADY TO THAT POND.
DO YOU KNOW WHAT THEY DID? YEAH.
AND WHAT THE ISSUE D-O-D-O-T HAS MODIFIED, UM, LET ME FIND THEIR EXACT WORDING ON IT.
OUR HYDRAULICS GROUP HAS REVIEWED THE ATTACHED LETTER FROM THE TOWN OF HAMBURG, WHICH WAS
AND UPON CONSIDERATION OF EXISTING CONDITIONS DOWNSTREAM AND THE RETENTION POND, THEY MADE THE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDATION.
AND THEN THEY, THAT'S WHERE THEY TOLD US TO REDUCE OUR OUTLET.
BUT THEY SAID THAT, UM, THEY HAVE REMEDIATED, THEY HAVE DONE MODIFICATIONS TO THEIR OWN OUTLET STRUCTURE FROM THEIR BASIN THAT IS TRIBUTARY TO THAT DITCH TO IMPROVE SIT THE SITUATION DOWNSTREAM.
IT'S KIND OF UNIQUE IN THAT, UM, THERE'S QUITE AN ELEVATION DIFFERENTIAL, PARENTAL ELEVATION DIFFERENCE FROM HERE ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE POND, PROBABLY I'M, I'M GUESSING MAYBE 20 FEET.
AND SO, UM, THEY AGAIN MODIFY THE WATER THAT THEY'RE ALLOWING TO GO INTO THAT DITCH.
SO REGARDLESS OF ANY CHANGES WE MAKE IS THEIR POND IS CURRENTLY FUNCTIONING AND HAS ADDRESSED YES.
AND THEN FURTHER THE CHANGES THAT YOU'RE MAKING IN RESPONSE TO THE COMMENT WITH THE CHANGE SIZE FURTHER REDUCES THAT IMPACT FURTHER REDUCES THE IMPACT.
SO IT SHOULD BE FUNCTIONING EVEN BETTER.
IF YOUR UNDERSTANDING EXACTLY.
DID I GET THAT RIGHT? THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE BEING TOLD BY DOT BY DT.
AGAIN, I DON'T HAVE THE DETAILS ON HOW THEY MODIFIED THE OUTLETS.
THIS HAS ALL BEEN ROLLING IN ONLY IN THE LAST FEW DAYS.
SO THIS IS, THIS IS ALL NEW, BUT IT IS PROGRESS ADDRESSING THESE ISSUES.
SO IN YOUR MIND THAT THIS SHOULD BE AN IMPROVEMENTS AND YES.
WOULD NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THIS SHOULD BE IMPROVEMENT OVER THE BASE BASIS.
AND THAT WAS ONE OF THE CONCERNS THAT THE NEIGHBORS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT AT OUR MEETING, UH, JIM AND, UH, JOHN WAIC AND SEAN HOPKINS AND I MET WITH THE NEIGHBORS, AND AGAIN, THEY REITERATED THE SAME CONCERNS THAT THEY BROUGHT UP AT THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AND, UM, YOU, WE, THERE ISN'T REALLY ANYTHING WE CAN DO ABOUT THE LOWS LIGHTING AND, AND THE OTHER IMPACTS THAT HAVE COME IN THE AREA.
WE KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF TRAFFIC.
UM, I DON'T THINK THAT THIS SMALL USER OF WESTERN IS GONNA EXACERBATE THINGS IN THE AREA.
THIS IS USED, I BELIEVE, ON A KIND OF A TEMPORARY BASIS, JIM, JUST TO, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, YEAH.
SO IT'S, IT'S A, I CAN ADDRESS THAT SITE.
SO, I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S AN INTERNAL TOWING COMPANY TO US.
IT IS NOT IN COLLISIONS ON THE HIGHWAY AT 2:00 AM IT'S REALLY WHEN WE HAVE TO GET VEHICLES FROM ONE SPOT TO THE OTHER.
A LOT OF TIMES WE DON'T WANNA PUT MILES ON A CAR.
WE'LL TRANSFER A CAR FOR ANYBODY FROM ONE OF OUR DEALERSHIPS TO ANOTHER.
SO IF WE GOTTA GO TO EAST SYRACUSE, I DON'T WANT TO PUT, YOU KNOW, 200 MILES ON A CAR, UH, WE'LL TOW IT.
UM, THERE ARE TIMES, LIKE IF IT'S COME IN ON A TRADE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT AND IT'S NON-DRIVABLE, WE NEED TO TAKE IT OVER TO A BODY SHOP, TO A SERVICE CENTER.
THIS IS REALLY AN AREA FOR THEM TO PARK THEIR VEHICLE.
YOU KNOW, THE TOW TRUCKS, WE HAVE THREE OF THEM.
THEY'LL PARK THERE, THEY'LL HAVE A SMALL OFFICE, THEY'LL START THEIR DAY, GET THEIR DISPATCHES, GO OUT ON THE ROAD, COME BACK AT THE END OF THE NIGHT.
SO IT IS NOT, YOU KNOW, A, YOU KNOW, COLLISION, TOWING, WE'RE NOT GONNA BE STORING VEHICLES THERE THAT, YOU KNOW, ARE UNDRIVABLE, THAT TYPE OF STUFF.
TO SIMPLE REQUEST, THE STUDENTS HAVE ASKED IF THEY COULD HAVE THEIR THINGS SIGNED.
[01:35:01]
THAT THROUGH AN HOUR AND 15 MINUTES OF, OF A MEETING.I CAN'T FIND, YOU DON'T WANNA SEE HOW THIS ENDS? DON'T SEE HOW DEMOCRACY IN ACTION RIGHT HERE.
SO, SO TO CONCLUDE, WE'RE, UM, AGAIN, WE'RE SEEKING SITE PLAN APPROVAL, UH, AND A SPECIAL USE PERMIT.
AND, UM, I THINK WE'VE MADE EVERY EFFORT TO ADDRESS CONCERNS THAT HAVE COME UP THROUGH THIS PROCESS.
AND BY THE WAY, BECAUSE THIS IS A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, YOU CAN ADD REASONABLE CONDITIONS.
SOME OF THE CONDITIONS ARE, WHICH THEY'VE STATED THERE'S NO AUTOMOTIVE REPAIR HERE.
THERE'S A LIMIT OF THE AMOUNT OF SCARS THEY CAN STORE ON THE SITE, ET CETERA.
SO YOU CAN ADD TO SPECIAL NEWS FOR, I JUST WANNA CORRECT ONE THING.
IT IS A UNIQUE THING IN THE TOWN OF HAMPER, WE'VE LISTED THIS AS AN UNLISTED ACTION.
UNDER SEEKER, THEY DO HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION WHY I'VE HAD THIS CONVERSATION WITH DEC, THE TOWN CONSIDERS, IF YOU READ THEIR SPECIAL NEWS PERMIT LAW SAYS THIS IS NOT TO BE CONSIDERED ALLOWABLE USE UNLESS SHOWN TO ME.
SO UNDER THE LAW, BECAUSE OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT, IT BASICALLY IS NOT AN ALLOWABLE USE.
WE HAD THIS IN A COUPLE DIFFERENT, SO WE'RE GONNA DO A SECRET DECISION, A SHORT FORM AF, ET CETERA.
BUT THE BIG ISSUE ARE, IS ISSUE, SPECIAL USE PERMIT, AND THEN SITE PLAN APPROVAL.
AND AGAIN, CAN YOU ANSWER THE CONCERNS OF THE RESIDENTS AND MAKING SURE YOU HAVE CONDITIONS THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD CONTROL THE OPERATIONS AREAS.
AN ALLOWABLE USE BY SPECIAL USE, WELL ALLOWABLE USE IF SHOWN TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT.
UM, AND I, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WERE PLANNING, YOU DIDN'T ASK US TO PREPARE RESOLUTIONS, BUT YOU WANT TO GIVE FULL DIRECTION, GET AN ANSWER TO ARE WE PROCEEDING WITH APPROVALS AND WHAT CONDITIONS CAN WE PLACE IF WE NEED TO PLACE CONDITIONS ON THAT APPROVAL? SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR TONIGHT.
YOU DO NOT HAVE DRAFT RESOLUTIONS.
WE NOT AUTHORIZED TO PREPARE THEM.
UM, BUT YOU KNOW, THE PURPOSE OF TONIGHT IS KEEP ASKING ALL THE QUESTIONS.
CAN YOU ANSWER THE CONCERN? I THINK THE TRAFFIC ISSUE, YOU'RE RIGHT.
I MEAN OF ALL THE USES THAT COULD BE PROPOSED IN THIS DISTRICT, THAT'S PROBABLY THE USE THAT'S GONNA GENERATE THE LEAST AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC, UH, FOR THIS SITE.
BUT THERE ARE CONCERNS OF THE FACT THAT IT IS OUTDOOR PARKING OF VEHICLES.
THEY'VE ADDED AN EXTRA AREA OF BUFFER TO THE SITE, MAKING SURE THAT IT'S NOT IMPACTING THE ADJOINING RESIDENTIAL USES.
THEY ARE, SANDY KNOWS, UNFORTUNATELY THOSE PROPERTIES ARE ZONED COMMERCIAL, ALTHOUGH THEY'RE RESIDENTIAL USES.
THE FUN OF THE SITE HAS ALWAYS BEEN, IT'S BEEN THAT WAY FOR 30 YEARS.
WE NEVER UNDERSTOOD SANDY WHY IT WAS DONE THAT WAY.
BUT ALL THOSE PROPERTIES THAT THE FRONT FOR ZONE COMMERCIAL, THEY'VE BEEN THAT WAY FOR FOREVER.
UM, AND UM, SO ANYWAY, YOU'RE, YOU'RE ASKING THE RIGHT QUESTIONS YOU WANT TO PUT TOGETHER YOUR AUTHORIZATION, THUS WHAT A WHAT WHAT, UH, APPROVALS OR WHATEVER CONDITIONS YOU WERE PLACED OR WHAT ISSUES YOU HAD.
IS THERE ANY OTHER INFORMATION? I KNOW WE ASKED FOR INPUT FROM THE TRAFFIC SAFETY ADVISORY BOARD.
DID WE GET ANYTHING FROM THEM OR ANYTHING? NO, WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING FROM THEM YET.
SO I THINK THAT'S THE ONLY ONE THAT'S OUTSTANDING AS FAR AS THE INFORMATION WE'VE REQUESTED.
CAN WE TALK ABOUT THE LIGHTING PLAN ON THE SITE? I KNOW WE'VE GONE THROUGH SOME DIFFERENT, IT'LL BE DARK SKY COMPLIANT.
IS THERE A WAY THAT WE CAN DO SOME SORT OF DIMMING? I KNOW THAT THERE'S A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF SECURITY LIGHTING THAT WILL BE NEEDED, ESPECIALLY IF YOU HAVE PART THERE, TRANSFERRING DEALERSHIPS ON THE, ON THE SITE.
IS THERE SOME SORT OF, UM, MORE MINIMAL OR TURNING OFF LIGHTING THAT IS IN THE SPOTS CLOSEST TO THE JASON HOUSE? LIKE I DON'T KNOW HOW TALL YOUR LIGHT FIX, I MEAN, CAN THEY BE SHORTER LIGHT FIXTURES THAN YOU HAVE ON, I MEAN, THE BIG WEST LOTS HAVE, I DON'T KNOW, MASSIVELY TALL LIGHT POLES IS A SMALLER LOT.
CAN THEY BE SHORTER? WHAT CAN WE DO THERE? YEAH, I MEAN I, WE DID SUBMIT A PHOTOMETRIC PLAN AT THE AUTO DEALERS ASSOCIATION.
I KNOW, BUT IT'S STILL LIKE A, EVEN IF IT'S, YOU STILL SEE, I MEAN, WHETHER OR NOT IT IS DRIFTING OVER THE VIEW, SCAPE OUT THE WINDOW, LIZ, UH, SO I, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE, WE DO WITH LIKE SHORTER PULL LIGHT SECURITY AT NIGHT SO THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE AREN'T BREAKING INTO THE FENCED AREA AND STAYING STUFF.
IT HAPPENS EVERY NIGHT ON OUR SITES ALREADY.
UM, WITH THE, THE AMOUNT OF LIGHT ON THOSE ONES.
SO WE, WE DO NEED SOME SECURITY LIGHT, UM, WHETHER, YOU KNOW, UH, I'M SURE ROB CAN SPEAK MORE TO WHERE THE PHOTOMETRICS FALL.
UM, I, I MEAN IF WE CAN SHORTEN THE, THE POLE HEIGHTS IN SOME AREAS, I DON'T KNOW WHAT HEIGHT LIGHTING YOU'RE LOOKING AT, BUT ANYTHING THAT WE CAN DO TO DROP THAT LOWER, YOU STILL GIVE YOU THE, WHAT YOU NEED FROM A SECURITY PERSPECTIVE OR HAVE A SUBSET OF IT BECOME MOTION ACTIVATED AFTER A CERTAIN TIME.
I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW WHAT OTHER OPTIONS ARE THERE.
IT'S DIFFICULT TO READ THAT THERE'S THE BLURRY AT THAT SCALE, BUT WE DO MAKE THAT ZERO OUT AT THE PROPERTY
[01:40:01]
LINES TO NOT HAVE SPILLOVER SAY WHAT THE HEIGHTS ARE.SO YEAH, SO IF WE COULD FIGURE OUT WHAT HEIGHT THOSE THOSE ARE AND HOW MUCH ABOVE THE YEAH.
WE'RE LOOKING AT AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE, RIGHT? AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE.
AND AGAIN, THE LIGHT IS DIRECTED DOWNWARD, WHICH THE SHIELD ON TOP.
SO IF WE COULD GET THE HEIGHT OF THAT AND IF THERE'S ANYTHING YOU CAN DO TO IDENTIFY WHAT THE MINIMUM HEIGHT IS, WE'LL SUBMIT THAT DETAIL.
YEAH, I MEAN IT, IT IS AGAIN, AS LONG AS WE HAVE SOME SORT OF LIGHTING THERE THAT CAN, YOU KNOW, ACT AS A DETERRENT THING AS WELL AS THE POLICE DRIVING BY HAVING TO SEE SOMETHING MESSING AROUND BACK THERE OR SOMETHING LIKE THOSE TYPES OF THINGS.
SO, UM, YEAH, I GUESS WE CAN FOLLOW UP ON THAT AND FIND A, THAT DOESN'T SHOW WHAT THE HEIGHT IS CURRENTLY.
IT DOESN'T JIM? WE'LL, UH, BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO DEVELOP THAT AS THE PHOTOMETRIC, SO.
WE'LL I MEAN IT MIGHT BE ON YOUR SITE.
I I IF IT'S NOT ON THE STRONG, IS THERE ONE MORE SHEET THERE, JOSH? YEAH.
THEY DO, THEY TYPICALLY, THE NIAGARA FRONTIER AUTO DEALERS ASSOCIATION DEVELOPS THE LIGHTING PLAN FOR ALL THE WESTER DEALERSHIPS AND UM, THEY DO USUALLY INCLUDE A DETAIL.
WE WILL REDUCE, YOU KNOW, IT CERTAINLY WILL NOT BE OUR 25 FOOT S ELSEWHERE.
I CAN COMMIT TO SOMETHING, YOU KNOW, 15 FEET AND UNDER.
WE'LL REVIEW IT AND I'LL YEAH, IF YOU CAN TAKE A LOOK AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT TALL, I MEAN OBVIOUSLY IF YOU HAVE A TOW TRUCK WITH A VEHICLE ON IT THAT IS TALLER THAN JUST A REGULAR VEHICLE.
BUT IF YOU COULD FIGURE OUT WHAT THE, THE SHORTEST HEIGHT YOU GUYS COULD DO IS, ROB, DO YOU REMEMBER WHAT WE REDUCED THE ONES AT LINCOLN'S BACK PROPERTY? 'CAUSE I KNOW ON ONE SIDE WE HAD 'EM TALL ON THE OTHER SIDE.
YEAH, THEY'RE PRETTY PRETTY 15.
I GONNA SAY THAT, THAT'S WHAT I REMEMBERED AS WELL.
THAT'S, IT'S QUITE LOW ALREADY.
AGAIN, BALANCING THE NEIGHBORS WITH SECURITY IS, IS KIND OF THE ISSUE.
BUT, UM, NO ONE WANTS NUISANCE LIGHTING.
I KNOW OF ONE LOT IN THE TOWN OF TOWANDA AND DELAWARE AVENUE AND THE TWO 90 THAT WHEN YOU DRIVE BY AT NIGHT, YOU'D THINK IT WAS DAYTIME.
AND THEY'RE SO TALL THAT I KNOW THAT BECAUSE THE TWO DOT, THERE'S LIKE TWO DIFFERENT DOTS IN THE MIDDLE AND IT, I'M NOT A RUNNER ACTUALLY, BUT THOSE ARE THE LIGHTS, RIGHT? THERE'S NO, THOSE ARE CATCH, NO, THOSE ARE ACTUALLY OUR CATCH BASE.
OUR LIGHTING WOULD BE IN THE MIDDLE.
AND THERE'S, THERE'S A TWO FIXTURES HERE.
SO IF YOU CAN JUST ALSO CONFIRM THAT THERE'S NO WAY TO MOVE THEM TO FIXTURE LOCATIONS FURTHER FROM THE HOUSE.
I MEAN THAT WOULD JUST CONFIRM HOW FAR AWAY FROM THOSE HOUSES YOU CAN MOVE THEM AND JUST MAKE SURE THAT WE'VE MOVED IT THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT THAT STILL MEETS WHATEVER YOUR REQUIREMENTS ARE THAT, YOU KNOW, SHORTEST, TIGHT, FURTHEST FROM THE OTHER.
A AGAIN, THE GOAL ON THE PHOTOMETRIC PLAN IS WHEN THEY REACH ZERO AT THE PROPERTY LINE, THAT'S WHEN YOU DON'T HAVE SPILLOVER TO THE ADJOINING SITES.
YOU TRY TO KEEP IT ALL WITHIN THE PROPERTY.
I THINK ALSO OVER TIME THE TREES THAT ARE PLANTED THROUGH THERE WILL ALSO HELP, UH, YOU KNOW, AS ANOTHER TYPE OF BUFFER AS WELL TOO.
AND WE DO IN ADDITION, AS WE'VE INDICATED IN ADDITION TO THE EIGHT FOOT FENCE, WHICH IS A REQUIREMENT, WE DO HAVE ALL THE LANDSCAPING AROUND THE FENCE AS WELL.
IT'LL JUST TAKE A LITTLE WHILE.
YEAH, I MEAN AS FAR AS THAT OUTPUT PIPE GOES, CODE ENFORCEMENT WANT LICENSE THINGS ARE ON THE SITE PLAN.
DO YOU WANT SOMETHING LIKE THAT ON THE SITE PLAN OR IS THERE A DIFFERENT WAY THAT, ISN'T IT ON THE SITE PLAN? WE HAVE IT ON OUR, YOU ALREADY HAVE IT ON THE SITE PLAN, ON THE ENGINEERING PLANS.
WE'VE MODIFIED THE ENGINEERING PLANS.
SO YOU ALREADY MADE THAT CHANGE.
THEY'VE, SO BECAUSE IT'S A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, WE CAN PUT THAT THEIR HOURS OF OPERATION ARE AROUND THERE WHEN THEY'RE HAVING RIGHT HOURS OF OPERATION, SAY AN HOURS OF OPERATION.
BUT BASICALLY WHAT THEY SAID THEY'RE GONNA OPERATE ON, YEAH, WE HAVE, WE COMMITTED TO 8:00 AM TO 6:00 PM 8:00 AM TO SIX NINE FOR SOME REASONS.
AND OUR DECISIONS ARE BASED UPON THAT ISSUE.
NOT THAT WE'RE TELLING THEM WHAT OUR DECISION IS BASED.
AND AGAIN, REASONABLE CONDITIONS, ESPECIALLY THIS BURN ARE VERY IMPORTANT.
SO THE AMOUNT OF CARS THAT WE STORED ON THE LOT, VERY IMPORTANT.
AND I KNOW NOT WESTERN IS NOT GONNA DO THAT, BUT WE'VE SEEN LOTS LIKE THIS THAT HAVE CARS PARKED EVERYWHERE.
IT'S GONNA BE LIMITED TO CARS PARKED IN THIS LOCATION.
SO THAT'S THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF VEHICLES THEY CAN HAVE ON
[01:45:02]
THE OTHER ISSUE THAT THEY ADDRESSED WAS WE HAD ASKED FOR THEM TO MEET THE 20 FOOT SETBACK BETWEEN THE YEAH.AND NOW YOU SAID 23, 23 0.8 FEET WE'RE ALMOST 24 FEET.
SO THE SAFE LANE HAS THAT, SO THE, THE EIGHT FOOT TALL WOOD STOCKAGE FENCE IS ON THE TWO SIDES ON THE EAST SIDE AND THE NORTH SIDE OF THE THING.
AND THEN THE OTHER SECTION ACROSS THE FRONT IS THE, AND ACROSS THE FRONT.
AND THE ONE SIDE IS THE CHAIN LANE.
SO WHERE YOU'RE FACING THE RESIDENTIAL, THAT'S THE EIGHT FOOT STOP CORRECT FENCE WITH LANDSCAPING ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT FENCE.
SO I'M GONNA MAKE A MOTION TO AUTHORIZE HAMBURG PLANNING CONSULTANTS TO DRAFT RESOLUTIONS FOR WEST.
HER, UH, RESOLUTIONS WOULD BE SITE PLAN AND SPECIAL USE PERMIT.
AND SEEKER AND SEEKER AND HAVE THOSE PREPARED FOR OUR ON OCTOBER 7TH, 18TH, FOURTH, 18TH WE'RE BOOKED.
YEAH, WE'RE BOOKED ON THE FOURTH.
SORRY, BUT YOU GUYS DON'T HAVE TO COME TO JUST, YOU JUST LOOK AT 'EM AND WELL NO, IS IF YOU GUYS CAN PROVIDE A LETTER LIKE THE LAST ONE YOU DID WITH THE INFORMATION ON HOW YOU LOOKED AT THE PLACEMENT OF THE LIGHTS AND IF THEY CAN MOVE ANY FURTHER.
AND YOU CAN THE HEIGHT AND THE HEIGHT AND IF THE HEIGHT ISN'T OF THE LIGHT STRUCTURES, IT'S NOT ALREADY ON THE PLANS, JUST MAKE SURE THEY ARE AND IF IT'S ALREADY THERE JUST, OR IF THERE'S A CHANGE.
SO THIS, IF YOU WERE TO VOTE TO APPROVE WOULDN'T BE UNTIL THAT 20TH THAT YOU JUST SAID 18, 18 18.
I'M JUST RUNNING OUT OF TIME TO CONSTRUCT THINGS.
NO, WHICH IS WHY WE'RE SO BACKED UP, I THINK.
WE'LL TRY TO GET THE DRAFT RESOLUTIONS OUT THAT FRIDAY BEFORE YOUR MEETING.
BUT YOU GAVE US AN EXTRA MEETING.
YOU'LL, YOU'RE NOT GONNA TRY AND DO, IT'LL BE BACK.
ALRIGHT, NEXT THE AGENDA IS THANK YOU.
CAMP ROLL INTERCHANGE RECOMMENDATION AND THE COURT DISCUSSION.
YOU HAVE ADDITIONAL DRAWINGS FOR US.
I HAVE THE DRAWINGS THAT I'VE BEEN HANDED OUT.
I WILL LET YOU, IF YOU DON'T WANNA SPEND A LONG TIME THAT I DOING THIS, UM, IF I CAN GET YOUR WORD THAT YOU PREPARED FOR THE NEXT TIME.
IS IT ON THE AGENDA WITH YOUR RECOMMENDATION AHEAD OF ME AHEAD OF TIME TO ME UNDERSTAND, HERE'S THE MAP.
HERE'S THE MAP SHOWING THE AREA WE HAVE ALREADY RECOMMENDED.
'CAUSE WE HAVE TO MOVE FORWARD ON THE, WHERE THE UH, UM, OLD, UH, LOOP WAS THAT'S BEEN RECOMMENDED.
THE TOWN BOARD'S PROBABLY GONNA PROVE IT.
WE'RE LOOKING AT ALL THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES ON WHETHER WHETHER WE SHOULD ALSO REZONE THOSE.
THE CAMP ROAD INTERCHANGE OR IF YOU HAVE SUGGESTIONS FOR OTHER ZONINGS FOR THAT.
AND I'LL BE VERY HONEST, WHAT'S CONSPICUOUSLY LEFT OFF OF THIS IS THE BEON PROPERTY.
WE HAVE NOT MADE A RECOMMENDATION ON THAT BECAUSE THEY HAVE AN ACTIVE APPLICATION BEFORE THE TOWN CAN'T.
WE MAKE RECOMMENDATION REGARDLESS.
AND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SAYS IT SHOWS A SPECIFIC PLAN FOR THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY.
AND THAT WAS THE CAMP ROAD INTERCHANGE AND THE
THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOES ON FARTHER TO SAY, LOOK AT THIS ENTIRE AREA FOR WHICH PRO SITES SHOULD BE REZONED TO CAMP ROAD INTERCHANGE OR TO OTHER APPROPRIATE ZONING DISTRICTS.
WE'RE TRYING TO CHANGE THE APPEARANCE OF THE CAMP ROAD INTERCHANGE MORE UPSCALE IMAGE.
TAKE A LOOK AT, IF YOU DON'T HAVE, I'LL SEND YOU, I DON'T HAVE ENOUGH COPIES, BUT GET A, GET A COPY OF THE CAMP ROAD INTERCHANGE DISTRICT OF WHAT THE INTENT OF THE CAMP ROAD INTERCHANGE IS.
IF YOU WANNA RECOMMEND THESE OTHER PROPERTIES, THAT IS FINE BY ME.
THE OTHER QUESTION THAT'S COME UP JUST TO LET YOU KNOW IS THAT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE THROUGHWAY, THIS LITTLE CORNER DOWN HERE, THIS RED CORNER DOWN HERE, PEOPLE ARE SAYING HOW COME WE'RE NOT CONSIDERING THAT FOR CAMP ROAD INTERCHANGE? IT'S ALL WETLANDS.
SO YOU COULD OFFER REZONING AT THE CAMP ROAD INTERCHANGE, BUT IT HASN'T BEEN DEVELOPED FOR THE LAST 20 YEARS BECAUSE IT'S ALL WETLANDS.
[01:50:01]
GONNA CHANGE WITH THE CHANGE.SO, UM, THE STATE IS ACTUALLY GONNA MAKE WHAT IT ZONED.
WHAT'S THAT? WHAT'S THE ZONING ON THIS FLOOR? ON, ON THIS THING HERE? THIS IS NOT ZONED, THIS IS BREW AUTHORITY PROPERTY.
SO YOU MEAN THINK, WHAT WAS THAT C TWO? THE DARK RED IS C TWO.
RIGHT? SO WE ARE, WHEN WE LOOKED AT IT AND WE SPOKE TO, NOT THAT WE GOT COMPLETE CONCURRENCE ON, BUT OBVIOUSLY WE'RE REZONING THIS, THIS WHERE THE, UH, OLD LOOP WAS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STREET.
THESE PRO THESE PROPERTIES HAVE BEEN IN QUESTION FOR A LONG TIME AND WE DEFINITELY ARE RECOMMENDING REZONING.
THE ONLY ONES ON THE, THESE LITTLE PROPERTY YOU SAY WE'RE RECOMMENDING REZONING IS THAT WE THOUGHT THESE WOULD DEFINITELY BE CAMP ROAD INTERCHANGE, BUT YOU MAY HAVE DIFFERENT IDEAS FOR IT.
THIS IS A BIG VACANT PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT WON'T PUT CROSS HATCH THROUGH IT.
THAT'S A BIG VACANT PIECE OF PROPERTY.
WHAT'S THAT? YOU YOU SAID BIG CROSSFIT MARY THE BIG ONE THAT IS, THAT IS VACANT NOW.
SO THE, AND I I'M SORRY TO JUMP THE OTHER THREE ON THE SAME SIDE OVER HERE.
I WANT GO ON RECORD IS SOME OF 'EM ARE ZONED INDUSTRIAL AND SOME ARE OWNED C TWO.
WE SPOKE TO THE LABORATORIES WHO OWN THAT PROPERTY.
THE LABORATORIES FIRST SAID NO, THEY DON'T WANT THEIR PROPERTY REZONED, BUT I SAID, WELL, WE'RE REALLY THINKING OF REZONING OTHER THAN I SAID PLEASE THINK ABOUT IT 'CAUSE IT'S GONNA COME UP THE VOTE.
SO THEY WERE NOT REAL SUPPORTIVE OF, OF THIS BEING CAMP ROAD INTERCHANGE, I'M TRYING TO BE HONEST WITH YOU.
BUT WE SAID, LOOK, WE'RE PROCEEDING WITH THAT BECAUSE WE THINK THIS WHOLE AREA SHOULD BE CAMP ROAD INTERCHANGED.
THEN YOU SLIDE INTO MORE COMMERCIAL ZONING AND THEN THIS IS INDUSTRIAL ZONING WHERE THERE'S MINI STORAGE.
AND BY THE WAY, WE'RE GONNA HAVE A PROPOSAL FOR ANOTHER MINI STORAGE ON ONE OF THESE PROPERTIES OVER HERE TOO.
SO I PENDING, I RECOGNIZE THAT THERE'S A PENDING APPLICATION POTENTIALLY UNDER CONSIDERATION FOR THIS.
I THINK THAT THE BENDERSON PROPERTY SHOULD BE CAMPER TO INTERCHANGE AS WELL.
IT'S IN LINE WITH THE GATEWAY AREA.
WHERE IS THAT? THAT'S FIVE TWO, I'M SORRY.
THESE ARE THE TWO VENDORS AND PIECE OF PROPERTY WHERE THEY'RE DEPOSING THOSE 800,000 SQUARE FEET OF LOCATION WAREHOUSING.
AND I MEAN, AND THERE, THERE THAT EXISTING PROJECT, THEY'VE ASKED FOR AN EXTENSION, RIGHT? BUT IT HASN'T BEEN GRANTED.
SO I GUESS WE COULD UNDER THE, BY THE WAY, EXISTING, THEY CAN'T BE ABLE FOR MORE THAN THREE MONTHS IN A ROW UNLESS THEY, UNLESS THEY ASK FOR AN EXTENSION OR THEY REAPPLIED THE TOWN IN THE TABLE FOR THREE MONTHS IN A ROW NOW.
SO I MEAN THAT WAS MY RECOMMENDATION THERE.
AND THE OTHER THING I THINK THAT THE TOWN SHOULD DO IS THESE PARCELS THAT ARE MULTIPLE ZONES SHOULD BE CONSOLIDATED TO THE DOMINANT ZONE THAT IS ON THE PROPERTY.
I REALIZE THAT SOME OF IT'S NOT DEVELOPABLE, BUT PUT ZONING ON THESE PARCELS.
LIKE ALL OF THESE, LIKE THIS, THIS, YEAH, THERE WAS METHOD TO THIS MADNESS.
THIS WAS PART OF THE BIG REZONING YEARS AGO WHEN THEY PUT THESE BUFFERS IN HERE AND PROVIDED, I KNOW IT'S CRAZY, BUT THAT'S WHAT IT WAS.
WELL, I MEAN IT WAS AT THE TIME, BUT IT NO LONGER MAKES SENSE AND I THINK IT SHOULD BE RESOLVED TWO O'CLOCK THAT RIGHT.
SO THE, THE THE COMMERCE PLACE PROPERTIES, RIGHT? I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH WE NEED TO COME BACK TO THIS SPREAD ONE WITH NO NUMBER.
WE DIDN'T PUT A NUMBER ON IT BECAUSE THESE WERE NOT BEING PROPOSED.
BUT THESE ARE THE TWO BIG PIECES THAT 800,000, WHY DON'T WE OWN THIS? SO IF WE, THIS ONE BECOMES CAMPER INTERCHANGE, WOULD WE WANT THIS BIG ONE TO ALSO BECOME CAMPER INTERCHANGE? I BE SUPPORTIVE OF, I THINK THE QUESTION IS DO WE WANT SMALL AREAS FOR CAMPER INTERCHANGE OR BIGGER? YOU'RE SAYING BIG AREA.
I WOULD WANT BECAUSE BIGGER LOOKING AT WHAT THE, THE, UM, IT'S BIGGER.
THE USES ARE USES, INSTRUCTIONS AND SO FORTH.
I THINK IT WOULD, THE BIGGER WOULD CON BETTER TO HAVE THIS TYPE OF A DIVE DIVERSE, YOU KNOW, INCLUSIVE.
THE, THE VISION WAS TO CHANGE THIS AREA TO SOMETHING DIFFERENT.
WE DID NOT WANT, IF YOU GO ON THE THROUGHWAY, THERE'S A LOT OF PLACES WHERE YOU GET OFF THE INTERCHANGE AND IT'S GASOLINE STATIONS AND REST STOPS AND WHATEVER.
RIGHT? THIS IS A GATEWAY TO THE TOWN AND THE VILLAGE.
THE WHOLE, EVEN THE GATEWAY PROJECT HAD RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THIS BEING CHANGED AND WHATEVER.
SO AGAIN, THE CONFERENCE PLAN, THE GATEWAY PLAN, ALL SAID THIS AREA NEEDS TO CHANGE.
WHAT WE'VE OFFERED TO THE PLANNING BOARD IS TO BE A RECOMMENDING BOARD.
REALLY TRULY A RECOMMENDING BOARD ON HOW THIS WOULD ALL WORK TOGETHER AND MAKE SENSE OF ALL THESE PROPERTIES.
JUST TO CLARIFY, THESE ARE C ONES.
AND THAT WHEATMAN ALSO, IF WE COULD END UP SAYING, UH, ALL OF THIS, ALL THAT COULD BE RECOGNIZED.
THE NEW NEW SOME OF THIS, EVEN THOSE IS NOT DEVELOP WHAT I'M SAYING.
IF YOU'RE GONNA COME ACROSS, I WOULD MAKE THIS ALL ART.
[01:55:01]
OH, THIS ENTIRE WAY HERE.AND THEN I WOULD TAKE THE REST OF THIS.
THE OTHER THING IS WEIRD, TINY LITTLE PARTS ZONE.
AND THAT'S ALL, IT'S ALL ZONE.
THE DOWN BOARD RE REZONED IS AS THE BUFFER TO THESE RESIDENTIAL AREAS LEFT AT RA.
SO NOTHING COULD EVER BE DEVELOPED THERE.
AND IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE A CONSERVATION AREA.
THIS A, THE RA AREA OF THE GREEN AREA.
AT THE BACK YEARS AGO WHEN THEY REZONED THIS SITE 20 YEARS AGO, THEY PUT THIS GREEN AREA IN AT THE PERMANENT PROTECTION TO THE RESIDENTIAL AREA.
IT REMAINED RA AND WE PUT A LEAD RESTRICTION ON IT SAYING THAT IT COULD NEVER BE DEVELOPED.
SO I WOULD NOT RECOMMEND CHANGING THAT GREEN AREA BECAUSE THAT, THAT WAS PART OF THE CONDITION OF, BECAUSE THE BRIDGE IS THERE.
ANDREW, WHAT'S UP WITH THIS? THE PINK AREA HERE IT IS AN OLD PIECE OF PROPERTY LEFT THAT WAY.
AND THEN IT GETS IN THAT I THINK THE NEXT PROPERTY IS AFTER THEY'RE IN THE VILLAGE.
WELL WHAT IS THAT? THAT'S, I'LL, I'LL GET YOU A BIGGER MAP.
YOU WERE FOCUSED ON THIS AREA.
I WILL GET YOU A BIGGER MAP SHOWING WHAT THESE OTHER AREAS AND WHY I THINK THIS IS C ONE.
I MEAN I'M PROPONENT OF MORE IS
PUT YOUR IDEAS TOGETHER AND AT THE NEXT MEETING, WHETHER WE DO IT TWO MEETINGS FROM NOW OR WHATEVER, YOU GUYS COME TOGETHER AND THEN COME TO A, YOU KNOW, A MAJORITY OF THIS IS WHAT WE WANNA RECOMMEND TO THE TOWN BOARD AND WHY, I GOTTA PUT YOUR REASONING WHY, BECAUSE THE TOWN BOARD IS GONNA GET QUESTIONING TO THIS.
THERE'S GONNA BE PEOPLE OPPOSED TO IT.
WE GOTTA PUT OUR REASONING FOR IT AND SAY WHY WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT DONE THIS WAY.
I WOULD ASK YOU, IT'S A GOOD START TO DO THAT.
START REFERENCING A COMP PLAN.
THEY NOW HAVE THE COMP PLAN BACK ON THE TOWN'S WEBSITE.
GOT OFF THE TOWN WEBSITE FOR A WHILE TO REFERENCE THAT.
THERE'S ACTUALLY A SPECIFIC PLAN SHOWN FOR THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY, HOW THEY WOULD LIKE IT DEVELOPED SO THAT THEY WENT FAR ENOUGH WITH THE GATEWAY TO SHOW ACTUALLY EXISTING PLAN.
TAKE A LOOK AT THAT PLAN BECAUSE THAT PLAN COULD HELP YOU FIGURE OUT, FIGURE, WELL, HOW THIS ALL COULD FIT, FIT TOGETHER HERE.
SO WE, WE WE'RE IN AGREEMENT THAT WE WANT, UH, MORE CAMP ROAD INTERCHANGE AS OPPOSED TO A LIMITED CAMP ROAD INTERCHANGE.
THAT'S THAT'S DEFINITELY, SO I THINK FOR SEE WHERE WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE? UH, 5 2, 2 0.
WE'RE THINK SO, SO EVERYTHING THAT'S ALREADY HAS THE, THE LINE ON IT, RIGHT? WE, WE WROTE INTERCHANGE FIVE.
THE PIECE OF PROPERTY DIRECTLY SOUTH OF THAT.
WE ALSO SAY CAN'T THROW IT INTERCHANGE.
THERE IS A PROPERTY LINE THAT KIND OF GOES ALONG THE BACK OF THE RESIDENTIAL.
IT EXTENDS ALL THE WAY TO THE 90, LET'S SAY WEST OF THAT RA AS A BUFFER.
AND IT HAS A PERMANENT DEED RESTRICTION TO IT, RIGHT? CONSERVATION AREA.
WELL THERE'S, THERE'S THE CONSERVATION AREA, BUT WE'RE EXPANDING THAT.
UH, SO THAT ENTIRE LOT, INSTEAD OF BEING PART RA, THE ALL RA UM, CONSERVATION EASEMENT STAY, UH, 3, 5, 6, 5 3, 5 9 AND 3, 3, 6, 5, 9, 3, 6, 3, 3, 3, 6, 7, 9.
THAT C ACROSS THE 90, THAT C ONE CAMP ROAD INTERCHANGE, BECAUSE YEAH.
UM, JUSTIFICATION FOR THAT PIECE IS CAMP ROAD INTERCHANGE IS A GATEWAY DISTRICT AND BECAUSE IT IS ADJACENT TO THE VILLAGE, WE THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE FOR A GATEWAY.
UH, ALSO ACRO ACROSS CAMP ROAD 5 2 0 1 AND 5 2 0 3.
NOW THEY HAVE EXISTING USES, WHICH WOULD BE GRANDFATHERED.
AND THEN THIS OTHER WEIRD LITTLE, THIS ONE IS A LOCK NUMBER.
SO SO THAT WOULD BE ALSO CAMP ROAD DRIVE DRIVE OR NO, TO GET BACK TO THE MOTEL.
IT'S A, IT'S A ROAD ACTUALLY THE NAMED ROAD THAT GOES BACK TO THE MOTEL.
SO, SO THAT WOULD BE CAMP ROAD INTERCHANGE ALSO.
NOW THE JUSTIFICATION FOR SUCH LARGE CHANGES
[02:00:01]
WOULD BE, UM, IF WE'RE GOING TO MAKE THIS INTO A GATEWAY, WE, WE LITERALLY NEED THE SPACE TO DO IT.UM, A GATEWAY IS GONNA HAVE, WHAT'S THAT? TO ADD SOME CONFORMANCE, RIGHT? THE GATEWAY'S GONNA HAVE GONNA OPEN SPACES, LIKE BUILDING MANAGEMENT IS GONNA BE PART OF THAT TOO, RIGHT? YEP, YEP.
YEAH, I SAID EVERYTHING THAT ALREADY HAD SLASHES ALL THE WAY.
SO THAT WOULD CREATE A, A, A NICE BIG SECTION THAT WOULD ALLOW SOME OF, OF MULTIPLE VACANT PARCELS THAT WOULD ALLOW SOMEBODY TO COME IN WITH A PRETTY SUBSTANTIAL AND INTERESTING, EXCITING PROJECTS.
WELL, THE OTHER THING TOO IS THAT LOOKING AT THE PERMITTED USES, THEY ARE MUCH MORE APPROACHABLE FROM LIKE SMALLER BUSINESSES AND BEING ABLE TO BE MORE'S THE CAMPUS LIKE SETTING SO THAT EVEN THOUGH IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S LIKE A BIG SWATH OF A CHANGE, IT'S REALLY ALLOWING FOR THIS VACANT LAND THAT WAS GOING TO BE, YOU KNOW, WAREHOUSES TO BE MORE ACCESSIBLE TO RESIDENTS AND USED BY, YOU KNOW, US, WHY WE PROCEEDED WITH THIS PIECE.
LIKE I SAID, IT AUGUST 20TH I THINK IS THE DATE.
THEY'RE, THEY'RE AUCTIONING THIS OFF OCTOBER.
SO I SENT 'EM THE CAMPER INTERCHANGE AND SAID THE TOWN BOARD IS REZONING THIS CAMPER INTERCHANGE.
SO THE PEOPLE BUYING IT KNOW WHAT THEY'RE BUYING, LOOKING OUT, LOOKING AT WHAT THE USES ARE AND SO FORTH.
SO I WOULD BE A PROPONENT OF TAKING THOSE PARCELS THAT ARE CURRENTLY WETLANDS AND IN SOME WAY REZONING THOSE BECAUSE THERE ARE OTHER RESOURCE CONSTRAINTS ON THE SITE, EITHER MOVING THEM TO CAMP ROAD INTERCHANGE, WHICH IF SOMEBODY WANTED SOME SORT OF A PARK, PASSIVE PARK, RECREATIONAL AREA ACCESSIBLE THAT WOULD POTENTIALLY PROVIDE THAT.
BUT I WOULD REMOVE THOSE FROM C TWO BECAUSE ULTIMATELY WHETHER OR NOT IF SOMEONE WANTED TO PAY FOR MITIGATION AND GET THROUGH THE CEC PROCESS, THEY COULD STILL DO THAT.
AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH WHAT WE WOULD WANNA SEE THERE.
SO I WOULD SAY THAT THE WETLAND PARCELS THAT ARE ACROSS THE STREET THERE, I WOULD WANT TO SEE THOSE CHANGE TO SEE A YEAH.
OVER THE LAST PROBABLY 25 YEARS, I'VE HAD TWO OR THREE PROPOSALS.
PEOPLE TALK ABOUT PUTTING HOTELS OR MOTELS HERE AND ALL OF 'EM GOT STOPPED BECAUSE THEY COULD NOT GET AROUND THE WEDDING.
I THINK BECAUSE IT THEN IT ALSO CREATES THAT CONSISTENCY WITH THE, THE SEED, RIGHT? SO LIKE WE HAVE LIKE THIS WHOLE AREA THAT THIS MAJOR INTERSECTION THE SAME VILLAGE, RIGHT? NOT, YEAH, THIS IS GRAY PARTS THAT THE OTHER SIDE, THESE TWO I, I MEAN I WOULD BE PROMOTED ALSO PROVIDE.
SO THAT'S WHY IT'S NOT, AND IT'S ALSO CONSISTENT WITH THE GATEWAY AREA WANTING TO PUT IN THOSE, THE, SO I THINK I HAVE 95% OF THE DIRECTION HERE.
I'LL PUT THAT ALL TOGETHER IN A NEW MAP AND GET IT OUT TO YOU.
WHEN WOULD YOU LIKE TO TABLE THIS DUE? SO THE 18TH
BEFORE WE, UM, CAN YOU ALSO PROVIDE A, A DRAFT WRITEUP OF OUR THOUGHTS THAT GO WITH IT? SURE.
THE OTHER REASONING? YEAH, THAT REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION.
WE'RE TRYING TO STANDARDIZE THAT REPORT.
HERE'S, HERE'S WHAT THE COMP PLAN SAYS.
HERE'S WHAT THE PLANNING BOARD SAYS.
HERE'S OUR REASONING AND LOGIC, WHAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING.
THE FOURTH WAS FULL BEFORE WE EVEN SORRY, IT UP AT THE LAST ONE.
SO TAB, I'M TABLING CAMP ROAD INTERCHANGE TO, UH, OCTOBER 18TH.
NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS A L SAL SEEKER STATUS UPDATES.
KIM NEESON PHILLIPS'S TITLE, SPECIAL COUNSEL TO THE COUNT ON THIS MATTER.
SO JUST TO GIVE THE BOARD AN UPDATE.
UM, AS YOU'LL RECALL, IN AUGUST, EARLY AUGUST, AUGUST 9TH, UM, THAT WE SENT A LETTER ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD AS THE AGENCY TO THE APPLICANT'S COUNSEL PROVIDING ALL OF THE PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM THE HEARING, THE EXPERT REPORTS, UM, AND ASKING THAT, UH, THE APPLICANT PREPARE RESPONSE SUMMARIES OF THOSE COMMENTS, RESPONSES TO THE COMMENTS, ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS BECAUSE THERE WERE A NUMBER OF, UH, CONCERNS AND ISSUES RAISED.
AND THEN PROPOSED REVISIONS TO THE DEIS TO AID THIS BOARD IN COMPLETION OF THE FEIS.
WE ASKED THEM TO DO THAT BY SEPTEMBER 15TH SO THAT WE COULD KEEP THE PROCESS MOVING AS IS REQUIRED BY THE SECRET REGULATIONS.
THE APPLICANT HAS NOT SUBMITTED ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.
SO THERE'S NOTHING FURTHER FROM THE APPLICANT IN RESPONSE TO ANY
[02:05:01]
COMMENTS MADE DURING THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.THERE WAS A LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT'S COUNSEL ON FRIDAY, UM, REFERENCING SPECIFICALLY THE D'S COMMENT LETTER ON THE DEIS AND ESSENTIALLY ASKING THIS BOARD TO ALLOW THE DEC TO MOVE FORWARD WITH INTERACTING WITH THE APPLICANT OUTSIDE OF THE SEEKER PROCESS AND SAYING THAT ESSENTIALLY REQUESTING THAT D WE ALLOW DEC TO MOVE FORWARD WITH ITS DECISION MAKING CONTINGENT UPON ANY APPROVALS OF THE MUNICIPAL LEVEL.
UM, THAT IS NOT HOW THE SECRET PROCESS WORKS.
AND THE COMMENT LETTER FROM THE DEC IS A COMMENT LETTER ON THE DEIS AND IT IS COMMENTS THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED IN THE SECRET PROCESS.
AND DEC CANNOT MOVE FORWARD WITH DETERMINATIONS UNTIL THE BOARD IS LEAD AGENCY HAS COMPLETED ITS OWN SEEKER PROCESS.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S THE ONLY CORRESPONDENCE THAT WAS RECEIVED FROM THE APPLICANT.
IN TERMS OF NEXT STEPS, WE ARE STILL MOVING FORWARD TO, UM, AN FEIS, UH, WITH THE GOAL OF ADOPTING THAT AT THE MEETING, OR WE WE'RE TARGETING THE DATE OF THE 18TH, UM, AS THE OUTSIDE DATE FOR THAT.
SO RIGHT NOW YOU HAVE DRAFT SECTIONS BEFORE YOU FOR REVIEW.
I ASK THAT YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THOSE.
LET ME KNOW ANY QUESTIONS, LET DREW HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
UM, AND WE'LL CONTINUE TO SEND ALONG ADDITIONAL SECTIONS AS THEY ARE AVAILABLE.
AND AT THE NEXT MEETING YOU CAN GET INTO A DETAILED DISCUSSION OF THOSE IF NEEDED.
ANY COMMENTS ON THE THINGS THAT WE WANT TO PUT IN THE FEIS THAT WE HAVEN'T ADDRESSED YET? ANYTHING THAT WE WANNA TALK ABOUT? I MEAN, WE, YOU'LL SEE THAT THE SECTIONS IN THE DOCUMENT OUTLINE GENERALLY THE TABLE OF CONTENTS AS THE BOARD HAS PREVIOUSLY REVIEWED THEM.
UM, ONE CHANGE IS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT POTENTIALLY ADDING A SEPARATE SECTION FOR ESSENTIALLY ADDITIONAL DEFICIENCIES THAT WERE IDENTIFIED AFTER THE PUBLIC COMMENT PROCESS.
RATHER THAN THAT BEING A SEPARATE SECTION, IT IS INCORPORATED IN SECTION THREE ALREADY, WHICH COVERS DEFICIENCIES.
THAT'S REALLY THE ONLY TABLE OF CONTENTS CHANGE FROM WHAT YOU'VE PREVIOUSLY REVIEWED IN RESPONSE TO THE COMMENTS THAT WERE RECEIVED BY THE PUBLIC.
ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONAL STUDIES OR INFORMATION THAT WE WOULD NEED TO UNDERTAKE IN ORDER TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE RESPONSIVE TO THE COMMENTS RECEIVED? OR ARE WE ABLE TO ADDRESS THEM IN THE DOCUMENT WITHOUT ADDITIONAL ADDITIONAL STUDIES BEYOND THOSE WE HAD ALREADY SCOPED IF WE'RE GONNA ADDRESS THEM BY STATING WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED IN THE, THE ONES, THE ONES I THINK THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT WHERE WE DON'T QUITE HAVE THE INFORMATION TO ANSWER THE QUESTION, THAT'S GONNA BE THE ANSWER THAT WE'RE PUTTING IN THE FEIS THAT WE'VE ASKED FOR THE INFORMATION.
WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN THE INFORMATION, SO THEREFORE WE CAN'T ANSWER THE QUESTION.
SO THAT WILL BE DEEMED, UH, A DEFICIENCY EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT THAT, UM, THE TOWN'S EXPERTS THAT WERE HIRED HAVE ADDRESSED THAT QUESTION ALREADY.
THEN WE WOULD SPEAK TO THOSE SPECIFIC SECTIONS.
IF WE, IF WE HAVE THE INFORMATION TO ANSWER THE QUESTION, WE'RE GONNA ANSWER IT.
WE DON'T HAVE THE INFORMATION TO ANSWER THE QUESTION.
WE'RE GOING TO IDENTIFY THAT THE APPLICANT HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION AND WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED IT.
SO THINGS LIKE DE'S COMMENT ABOUT ALTERNATE SITES AND THINGS, IF THEY HAVEN'T PROVIDED US ANYTHING, THERE'S RIGHT.
BUT IT'S STILL A COMMENT THAT YOU ALL OFFER KNOWLEDGE AND ADDRESSES THE AGENCY.
IT'S A REQUEST FOR SPECIFIC MITIGATION TOO.
BUT THERE'S, YEAH, THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT D THAT WE WOULDN'T HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION TO ADDRESS.
SO AGAIN, LET ME KNOW IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR OUR FAN BASE ON FACEBOOK.
SO FEIS WE'LL TALK ABOUT IN THE COMING MEETINGS, WE'RE ANTICIPATING THAT, THAT ONCE WE AGREE WITH IT, THEN GETS POSTED TO THE TOWN'S WEBSITE AND THEN FILED WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL NEWS.
SO THAT WILL BE
SO THAT WILL ULTIMATELY, AFTER WE FINALIZE OUR DRAFT, BECOME AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC ON THE WEBSITE, IT'LL IMMEDIATELY BE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC AS SOON AS WE GET IT UP ON THE WEBSITE.
THERE'S NO OFFICIAL PUBLIC HEARING OR WHATEVER, BUT THE PUBLIC CAN PROVIDE COMMENTS ON AN FEIS.
THERE'S JUST NO OFFICIAL, YOU KNOW, PART OF THAT CAN, THAT'S RIGHT.
THAT'S THE ISSUE IS THAT IT'S AVAILABLE.
YOU CAN RECEIVE CORRESPONDENCE ON IT FROM THE PUBLIC, BUT IT'S REALLY NOT LIKE AN A-D-E-I-S WHERE YOU'RE GONNA ANSWER THE, WHERE YOU'RE JUST GONNA CONSIDER ALL THAT STUFF IN YOUR DECISION, WHICH IS YOUR FINDINGS.
AND THE FINDINGS COME HOW LONG AFTER THE FBIS
[02:10:01]
AFTER THERE HAS TO BE AT LEAST 10 DAYS.SO MINIMUM TIME FOR, FOR THE PUBLIC TO DIGEST THE FBIF.
AND IN THAT TIME PERIOD, WE, THAT MINIMUM 10 DAY TIME PERIOD IS ALSO TO, TO TALK WITH OTHER AGENCIES BECAUSE YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO BE ON THE SAME PAGE.
THAT ONE AGENCY IS NOT MAKING DIFFERENT FINDINGS.
EVERY AGENCY HAS TO MAKE FINDINGS IN THEIR DECISION.
SO THAT TIME PERIOD IS FOR AN AGENCY TO SAY, WE'RE NOT ON THE SAME PAGE.
YOU KNOW, IF THAT WERE TO BE, IF THAT WAS THE CASE.
SO DOES DEC HAVE TO ISSUE THEIR OWN FINDINGS AS WELL? BECAUSE THEY HAVE THEIR OWN PERMIT.
SO WE WILL ISSUE OUR FINDINGS AND AT SOME POINT IN CONCERT WITH THEIR REVIEW PROCESS, DEC WOULD NEED TO ISSUE THEIR OWN FINDINGS BEFORE THEY COULD ISSUE ANY DETERMINATION.
SO THEY HAVE THOSE 10 DAYS TO SAY THAT WHETHER OUR FINDINGS AND THEIR FINDINGS WOULD BE CONSISTENT.
UM, IF YOU HAVE ANY SUGGESTIONS OR CHANGES ON WHAT WE'VE ALREADY GOTTEN, PLEASE SUBMIT THOSE TO KIM.
DON'T WAIT FOR THE NEXT MEETING BECAUSE THIS IS A LARGE DOCUMENT.
LET'S, UH, YOU KNOW, AS YOU GO THROUGH WITH IT, AS YOU GO THROUGH IT, MAKE NOTES, SEND THEM ON SO WE CAN HAVE THE CHANGES.
'CAUSE IF WE WAIT TO DO THAT AT MEETINGS, IT'LL TAKE US WAY TOO LONG TO TRY AND FINISH THIS.
JUST TO REITERATE THAT, PLEASE DON'T NOT SEND 'EM TO JOSH OR I SEND 'EM TO KEN.
ANYTHING ELSE? EVERYBODY UNDERSTAND WHAT WE ARE SUPPOSED TO DO? OKAY.
FOURTH MINUTES ARE FROM THE SIXTH.
SARAH WAS TIED UP FOR SOMETHING FOR THE TOWN OF AUSTIN.
UM, BUT SHE'S WORKING ON IT AND I KNOW I GOT HER TO ASK LIZABETH FEED MORE PEOPLE.
UM, THERE WAS MEETING HAD THAT SHEET, SO I I SENT THAT OVER TO HER AND I KNOW THE OTHER THING THAT SHE WANTED.
YEAH, SHE WERE GONNA GET THE SIGN IN SHEET FOR A PUBLIC HEARING AT THE LAST MEETING.
A COPY OF THAT TO SARAH FOR A BARKLEY.
REALLY QUICKLY, BEFORE YOU, UH, YOU HAVE, UM, OFFICIAL FROM VENDORS AND ASKING TO EXTEND AND FOR 90 DAYS THEIR HANDBOOK, PROXYING PROJECT.
UM, IT'S TODAY ACTUALLY THE THREE QUOTE FROM WHEN THEY FIRST APPEARED AND THEY'VE BEEN ABLE SINCE THEN.
UM, SO THEY IN WRITING HAVE SUBMITTED TO YOU GUYS, UM, ASKING TO EXTEND 'EM FOR ANOTHER 90 DAYS.
AND THAT'S SOMETHING WE VOTE ON.
IS THAT SOMETHING THE CHAIR DECIDES? IS THAT, UH, WE DON NEED A FORMALITY, DON'T WE DON'T NEED A RESOLUTION PER SE? THE CODE SAYS IF REQUESTED AND APPROVED.
SO, SO WHAT DOES APPROVED MEAN? DOESN'T REQUIRE A RESOLUTION.
SO I GUESS IF YOU JUST, WE HAVE A MAJORITY IN FAVOR OF APPROVING IT, WE APPROVE IT.
YOU KNOW, I, SO THAT'S THE QUESTION.
I MEAN THAT'S THE CASE WITH US THAT HE GAVE.
WAS HE STILL DEALING WITH THE THE RESIDENTS? YES.
IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THEY'VE HAD TWO MEETINGS AND THEY'RE SCHEDULED FOR ANOTHER VERY SOON.
I THINK THERE WAS AN GIVEN US REALLY NO, NO PLAN OR ANYTHING.
I DON'T THINK THEY'VE MADE FORMAL REVISIONS TO THEIR PLAN BECAUSE THEY'RE CONTINUING TO MEET, WHICH WOULD BE THE BASIS OF THIS REQUEST.
COULD BE COMPANY YOU SHOULD ADDED TIME.
THEY COULD HAVE COME TO GIVE US AN UPDATE, I GUESS IS THE THING THAT I WOULD SAY IS THAT WE'VE NOT GOTTEN WHAT THOSE MEETINGS HAVE BEEN ABOUT.
WHAT WE'RE TRYING, WHAT TYPE OF PROGRESS, TRYING TO MAKE WHAT WE MIGHT BE LOOKING AT.
WE HAVE NOT GOTTEN ANY UPDATE AT ALL FRONT BECAUSE HIS, HIS LETTER DID NOT INCLUDE ANY REQUESTS, ANY DETAIL OR UPDATE ON CHANGES OR THINGS THAT AREN'T PROCESSED.
LET TALK ABOUT RECENT MEETINGS, UH, SEPTEMBER 14TH.
GOOD PROGRESS HAS BEEN MADE TO DATE.
LIKE WHAT ARE, WHAT ARE THE ISSUES THEY'RE LOOKING AT OR, WELL, NONE OF THE ISSUES THAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT WITH THE NEIGHBORS, THE SAME AS WE WOULD HAVE AS A PLANNING BOARD.
SO IF THEY'RE LOOKING AT CHANGES ANYWAYS, THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO SUBMIT A REVISED SITE PLAN ANYWAYS.
SO WE'RE EXPECTING THAT THERE'S GONNA BE UPDATED DRAWINGS AND DOCUMENTATION THAT ARE COMING IN.
SO I GUESS WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE PROCEDURALLY BETWEEN IF THEY RESUBMIT AND A NEW SITE PLAN WITH A NEW APPLICATION? I MEAN, DO THEY, WOULD THEY HAVE TO REPAY THEIR FEE? YES.
THEY WOULD HAVE TO REPAY THEIR FEE.
[02:15:01]
ORGANIZATION.IF WE'RE GONNA BE CHANGING THAT OR COMMENDING THAT IT BE CHANGED, DO WE REALLY WANNA DO ANYTHING WITH THAT? DO WE WANT TO GET SOLVE HOPE IN THAT TERMS? THEY GUESS WHAT PAL, YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? I DO KNOW WHAT YOU'RE BEING.
ANY OTHER INPUT? I'LL DO A ROLL CALL.
SO, UM, SO WHETHER OR NOT WE WANT TO APPROVE INSIDE THE TABLE,
IS THIS, IS THIS THE FIRST TIME THEY'RE ASKING FOR AN APPROVAL OR FOR AN EXTENSION? OH, SORRY.
CAN ONLY, SO THIS IS THEIR FIRST EXTENSION THAT THEY'RE ASKING.
SO TOO, SO IF THEY APPLIED UNDER THE ASSUMPTION THAT IT WAS C TWO C TWO, IT'S C TWO RIGHT NOW, WHAT IS THE, WHAT IS, WHAT CAN THEY DO IF WE CHANGE IT TO CAMP ROAD? WHAT, WHAT'S THEIR, WHAT COULD THEIR APPROACH BE? WHAT IMPACT WOULD IT HAVE ON THEM? WELL, IF THEY HAVE AN EXISTING APPLICATION AND WE WERE TO REZONE IT, THERE WOULD BE REALLY NO IMPLICATION BECAUSE IT WAS AN EXISTING APPLICATION.
IT'D BE ALMOST LIKE A, ALMOST LIKE A GRANDFATHERED USE TYPE SCENARIO.
I WOULD SAY THAT WE HAVE ALREADY PROVIDED EXTENSIVE COMMENT TO THE APPLICANT ON THE FACT THAT THERE WAS A WHOLE GATEWAY PLAN THAT CAME OUT AND THAT PART OF OUR SECRET ANALYSIS HAS TO DEAL WITH COMMUNITY CHARACTER AND CONSISTENCY WITH PLANS.
AND THE THING THAT I SAID TO HIM AT THE MEETING WAS, AND I KNOW 'CAUSE I SAT IN THAT MEETING THAT HE WAS THERE, BENDERSON WAS REPRESENTED, HE DIALED INTO THAT MEETING.
SO HE'S HEARD THIS FEEDBACK ABOUT WHAT THE TOWN'S GOALS WERE WITH REGARD TO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
AND WE HAVE FAILED TO SEE ANY INFORMATION ABOUT HOW THE PROPOSAL THAT THEY HAVE, REGARDLESS OF ZONING IS IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE GATEWAY AREA PLAN AND THAT THAT IS ACCURATE.
THE PROPOSAL TALKS ABOUT HOW IT'S, UH, IS LESS OF AN IMPACT THEN SOMETHING THAT WAS APPROVED BEFORE.
BUT WHATEVER IT WAS THAT WAS APPROVED BEFORE WAS WELL BEFORE THE GATEWAY PROJECT, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, ALL THOSE THINGS YOU MENTIONED.
SO I MEAN I, I DON'T KNOW, WE WOULD NEED TO WORK WITH JENNIFER ON THE SPECIFIC ZONING IMPLICATIONS AND, AND IT WOULD TAKE SOME TIME FOR THIS TO GO THROUGH WHATEVER THE TIME PROJECT PROCESS IS.
BUT REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THE ZONE THAT OR NOT, THE ISSUE STILL REMAINS THAT THE PROPOSAL THAT IS IN PLACE IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE GATEWAY AREA PLAN OR SOMEONE WAS PROPOSED IN A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THAT HAS NOT BEEN ADDRESSED.
AND IF SO, IT WAS REZONED BEFORE AN APPROVAL THERE'D BE, EVEN IF WE EXTENDED IT THERE, THERE'D BE DIFFICULTIES.
SO YOU WOULDN'T DO GRANDFATHER DOWN? NO, NO.
SORRY, YOU HAVE TO WRITE THAT DOWN IN MY DI BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT WRONG VERY OFTEN.
YOU GIVE A, WHAT WAS THAT DENNIS? GIVE HER A PAY
UH, OKAY, SO DENNIS IS NO, NO, I'M GONNA GO WITH NO BECAUSE THEY HAVEN'T PROVIDED ANY OF THE INFORMATION WE ASKED FOR CINDY.
SO EITHER WAY DECIDED, WELL BILL, WHAT WAS YOURS? THERE'S FOUR
GET AN OPINION FOR THE REST OF THE BOARD THEN I MAKE UP.
THAT IS THE OPPOSITE OF HOW IT WORKS.
VOTE FOR NO, SHE HAVE AN INFLUENTIAL MOTION.
SO WE'RE GONNA WORK WITH JENNIFER ON RESPONSE LETTER TO THE REQUEST.
BASICALLY TELLING THEM THAT WE'VE RECEIVED A REQUEST.
WE'RE NOT GRANTING THE EXTENSION.
SO IN THEORY THEY COULD JUST RESUBMIT THE SAME APPLICATION, THEY COULD RESUBMIT THE SAME APPLICATION.
THEY CAN'T, BUT IT DOESN'T CHANGE ANY OF THE RIGHT.
SO WHAT IS THE REZONING GONNA HAPPEN? WELL, THE TOWN BOARD WILL DECIDE ON THE REZONING.
SO WHAT WE HAVE SCHEDULED RIGHT NOW IS WE WOULD PROBABLY ISSUE A RECOMMENDATION AT OUR SECOND MEETING IN OCTOBER.
THEN THE TOWN BOARD WOULD GET, THEY'D HAVE TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING.
YOU'RE LOOKING AT NOVEMBER, DECEMBER FOR THAT BEFORE THE END OF THE YEAR?
[02:20:01]
POSSIBLY.SO PROBABLY LIKE MAYBE BEFORE THE END OF THE YEAR.
WELL IT WOULDN'T BE EARLY IN JANUARY.
ARE YOU GONNA LET THEM KNOW THAT THERE'S PENDING CHANGES? THEY'RE NOT REQUIRED TO, THAT FORMAL RECOMMENDATION HAS NOT OCCURRED YET.
MM-HMM UM, ALL WE CAN SAY IS FOR NOW ON THE RECORD IS NOT ON THE LETTER LETTER, BUT WE'VE SAID FROM DAY ONE WITH THEM, PART OF THE SECRET PROCESS IS CON CONFORMANCE TO THE TOWN'S PLANS.
THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO SHOW US HOW THEIR PROJECT CONFORMED TO THE TOWN'S PLANS AND THE TOWN IS IN THE ACT OF REZONING PROPERTIES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEIR COMPREHENSIVE PLANS.
WE RENTED THE SAME ISSUE WITH OTHER PROJECTS AND WHATEVER.
SO WE'RE PROCEEDING WITH THAT.
SO AGAIN, THAT'S PART OF THE SECRET PROCESS, WHETHER IT HAPPENS OR NOT.
WE'VE TOLD DAY ONE THAT THIS IS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TOWN'S PLAN AND YOU'RE HAVE TO SHOW US HOW IT'S IN ACCORDANCE 800,000 SQUARE FEET.
I'VE EVEN WENT ON THE RECORD ALREADY TELLING 'EM THAT'S NOT WHAT THE INTENT, THERE WAS A SPECIFIC REZONING WITH A SPECIFIC INTENT OF WHAT WAS GONNA BE DEVELOPED IN THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY.
IT'S NOT EVEN ACCORDANCE WITH THAT.
EIS AND REZONING THAT TOOK PLACE WAS VERY SPECIFIC AND VERY ABOUT WHAT WAS GONNA HAPPEN THERE.
UM, SO WE'VE GONE ON THE RECORD, THEY'VE JUST MADE A PROCEDURE ERROR HERE, BASICALLY NOT PROCEDURAL.
THEY, THEY'VE GONE THREE MONTHS WITHOUT WE GETTING NEW INFORMATION TO YOU.
WE'RE JUST TELLING 'EM THEIR APPLICATION'S EXPIRED.
IF YOU WANT TO REAPPLY, GUYS, YOU, YOU'VE, YOUR APPLICATION EXPIRE.
WE CAN'T JUST LET STUFF SIT AROUND FOREVER AND WHENEVER, WHILE YOU CONTEMPLATE WHETHER YOU'RE MOVING FORWARD WITH THE PROJECT, OUR LAW IS VERY CLEAR AND THE LAW DOES PROVIDE THEM A 50% DISCOUNT TO REAPPLY WITHIN SIX MONTHS.
SO WE WILL REFER THEM TO THE LAW THAT THEY CAN REFERENCE WHEN THEY REAPPLY.
AND I THINK WE'LL ARTICULATE IN THE LETTER THAT WE HAVE GOT ANYTHING, WE HAVE NOT KNOWN NEW INFORMATION, WE JUST SEE NO REASON TO EXTEND IT.
AND THEN BASICALLY YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO REAPPLY.
WELL, IS IT THAT WE SEE NO REASON TO EXTEND IT OR SHOULD WE ADDRESS, MENTION SOME OF THE SECRET ISSUES THAT WE FEEL LIKE AREN'T BEING RESOLVED.
I'VE SAID IT AGAIN ON THE RECORD.
THEY KNOW THAT'S A BIG CONCERN OF THE PLANNING.
IT'S GONNA HAVE TO BE ADDRESSED.
WE COULD ATTACH THESE MINUTES TO OUR LETTER.
I MEAN, IT'S NOT LIKE WE DIDN'T EXPLICITLY ASK THEM FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.
PROVIDED THAT'S, THAT'S THE KEY FOR ME IS THAT WE DID ACTUALLY EXPLICITLY ASK FOR INFORMATION AND IT WASN'T PROVIDED.
MOTION BY DAN SECOND BY KATELYN M ON FAVOR.