[00:00:01]
SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SO YOU LOOK LIKE YOU'RE RUNNING.SO EVEN IF IT WASN'T SPECIAL USE PERMIT WOULD ALLOW TO OKAY.
I BELIEVE BECAUSE I HAVE TO BE SOMEWHERE ELSE.
I DUNNO IF, BUT ESPECIALLY THE HURRICANE.
[00:14:26]
THINK[00:14:26]
IT MIGHT BE NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO GET BILL I ABLE TO GET, BUT I, IF YOU DO A CONDITION APPROVAL, THAT'S LONG BECAUSE THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT GO THROUGH THOSE APPROVAL.SO IF THEY SAY, HEY, PLANNING SAID YOU NEED TO GET YOUR BUILDING TAKE ACTION, THEN MY NOSE WITH THEM.
SO YOU CAN'T TEXT HIM? NO, I CAN.
I MEAN, WHEN YOU SEE HIM SAY, WE THOUGHT ABOUT THAT,
[00:15:01]
WHAT HE SAYS FOR SEE WHAT HE SAYS FOR NEXT TIME.AFTER SEVEN, UH, WELCOME TO THE DECEMBER 6TH, 2023 MEETING OF THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD.
EVERYONE PLEASE RISE THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS.
ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVIDUAL WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE.
ALL RIGHT, FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS A PUBLIC HEARING FOR JOHNSON'S LANDING REQUESTING SITE PLAN, APPROVAL OF A PROPOSAL FOR A PARKING LOT EXTENSION FROM 134 SPACES TO 204 SPACES AT BORDY 40 LAKE SHORE ROAD.
AND THIS WAS NOTICED IN THE SUN PROPERLY THIS TIME, RIGHT? MM-HMM
UH, CHRIS WOOD WITH CARWOOD DESIGN WE'RE THE ENGINEERS OF THE PROJECT.
ALSO WITH ME IS BOB JOHNSON, WHO'S THE OWNER OF THE FACILITY.
UH, WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING, UM, BACK UP A LITTLE BIT.
UH, PREVIOUSLY WE WERE HERE FOR APPROVAL OF THE BUILDING IN THE ORIGINAL PARKING LOT, WHICH HAS BEEN OPEN SINCE SUMMERTIME.
UM, THEY'VE NOTICED THAT THEY NEED SOME ADDITIONAL PARKING, AS YOU KNOW, ANY OF YOU HAVE BEEN THERE.
YOU PROBABLY NOTICED THAT ALSO ON BUSY DAYS.
SO WE'RE PROPOSING AS A PARKING EXPANSION TO THE NORTH, WE'RE ADDING A NET 70 PARKING SPOTS.
UM, THIS WAS HERE A MEETING OR SO AGO.
YOU GUYS ASKED FOR SOME ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING AND WE DID RECEIVE A CONSERVATION ADVISORY BOARD LETTER, WHICH WE SUBMITTED RESPONSES TO.
UM, SO IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS, I CAN ANSWER 'EM.
ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS BEFORE WE GO TO THE PUBLIC HEARING? READ THE NOTICE.
NOTICE THAT HEREBY, GIVEN THAT THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD WILL CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING, THAT PROPOSAL BY JOHNSON'S LANDING FOR A PARKING LOT EXPANSION FROM 134 SPACES TO 204 SPACES AT 4 0 4 0.
PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD DECEMBER 6TH AT 7:00 PM IN ROOM SEVEN B OF THE HAMBURG TOWN HALL.
ALRIGHT, THIS TIME I'M GONNA OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING.
WAS THERE ANYBODY HERE THAT WANTED TO SPEAK ABOUT THIS PROJECT? YES.
YOU COME UP AND STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE.
YOU COME TO PODIUM, COME ON UP.
AND UM, UM, THE CONSERVATION BOARD ALREADY SUBMITTED A MEMO, WHICH I'M THINKING YOU ALL SAW.
I HAVE A COPY OF IT ANYWAY THAT I GIVE YOU NOW.
UM, WE SUBMITTED IT AND IT WASN'T A PUBLIC HEARING, BUT PERHAPS THIS IS BEHIND YOUR HEAD.
SO TONIGHT I WOULD LIKE TO ADD, UM, UH, ATTACHED I'VE GOT SOME PHOTOS.
ONE OF THE THINGS WE TALKED ABOUT IN THE STATE IN THE MEMO WAS PERMEABLE SURFACE AND ATTACHED I HAVE SOME PHOTO FULLY SIGNED SOME PHOTOS OF A PERMEABLE SURFACE PARKING LOT ON BURKE ROAD IN LAKEVIEW ADJACENT TO THE ATHLETIC FIELDS.
THIS GRAVEL PERMEABLE PARKING LOT WAS DESIGNED AND PUT IN, PUT OUT BID BY THE TOWN OF HAMBURGER ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, SUMMER OF 2023 AND CONSTRUCTION COMPLETED EARLY FALL.
IT'S AN EXAMPLE OF PERMEABLE SURFACE FOR A PARKING LOT, ESPECIALLY ONE COULD THINK MAYBE GOOD FOR OVERFLOW PARKING.
THIS TYPE OF GRAVEL ALLOWS FOR DRAINAGE AND IS WAY LESS COSTLY THAN ASPHALT OF CONCRETE.
IT IS ONE OF THE TYPES OF PERMEABLE SURFACE ADVOCATED BY THE CONSERVATION ADVISORY BOARD.
SO WE HAVE SOME PICTURES AND I HAVE THIS ADDITIONAL STATEMENT TO GO ALONG WITH THE FIRST MEMO THAT'S TODAY.
YOU WANNA SEE THE OTHER MEMO? NO, NO, NO.
AND WE CAN KEEP THESE PICTURES, RIGHT? YES.
[00:20:05]
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? UM, FOR THE THIRD AND FINAL TIME, ANY MORE COMMENTS ON THE JOHNSON'S LANDING PARKING LOT EXPANSION? ALRIGHT, CONFIRM.I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
SO CODE ENFORCEMENT IS INDICATED THAT THERE'S SOME OUTSTANDING ISSUES.
I GUESS IT JUST HAS TO DO WITH, UH, SOME SOMETHING'S EXPIRED AND THERE'S SOMETHING ABOUT SIGNS, BUT THEY ASKED US NOT TO TAKE ANY ACTION UNTIL THAT'S RESOLVED SO BOB, BOB CAN ADDRESS IT.
BUT WE, WE TALKED ABOUT IT EARLIER.
HE DID GO TO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT TODAY MM-HMM
PAUL DIDN'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT IT IN THE TOWN IN THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT.
AND HE SAID MY OCCUPANCY'S BEEN ALL SET SINCE AUGUST.
SO HE DOESN'T KNOW WHY HE DOESN'T, HE DIDN'T KNOW WHAT IT WAS ABOUT.
SO HE WAS GONNA LOOK INTO IT FURTHER.
ALL, I BELIEVE IT WAS EXPIRED BUILDING PERMIT, BUT PERMIT THE BILLING'S DONE AND OCCUPIED AND CO IS ISSUED.
I BELIEVE THERE WAS AN ISSUE WITH NO SIGNED PERMIT AS WELL.
HE, HE, HE ASKED ME ABOUT A SIGNED PERMIT AND I HAD A CHECK WITH ME AND HE SAID HE WAS GONNA TALK TO EVERYBODY ELSE.
AND MY QUESTION WAS, I THINK MY PERMIT WAS PRETTY EXPENSIVE AND I COULDN'T BELIEVE THAT THE SIGN WAS INCLUDED.
I DON'T KNOW HOW THEIR PERMITS WORK, BUT WE'LL BE EITHER, THAT WAS THE, THE LAST TIME I SAW JEFF IN THE ENGINEERING OFFICE THERE WAS MENTIONED THAT ONE OF THE ISSUES WAS ASSIGNED PERMIT OR LACK OF SIGN, I BELIEVE ASSIGNED PERMIT WAS $30 IS WHAT I WAS LOOKING INTO.
THAT THAT WAS PRETTY NOMINAL FEE FOR I THINK IN THE BIGGER SCOPE OF THINGS, I'M NOT GOING ANYWHERE FOR 30 BUCKS, SO.
AND I, I MEAN, WE DID TRY AND REACH OUT TO SEE IF THEY'D BE OKAY IF WE DID A CONDITIONAL APPROVAL, BUT WE HAVEN'T HEARD BACK.
SO BECAUSE THEY ASKED US NOT TO TAKE AN ACTION, I I'LL PUT IT ON FOR THE 20TH.
I WELL, I MEAN, AT SOME POINT GO AHEAD.
I MEAN AT SOME POINT I, I MEAN I'VE WAITED, I KNOW SIX WEEKS NOW BECAUSE OF THE PUBLICATION ISSUE.
I, I'VE DONE EVERYTHING THAT WAS ASKED OF ME.
I'VE PAID EVERYTHING THAT'S BEEN REQUIRED.
I'M, AGAIN, I WILL TAKE CARE OF IT WITH THEM WHEN THEY GIVE ME AN ANSWER AS TO WHAT IT IS.
MY REQUEST THAT WAS SAID TO ME WAS, THE SIGN COMPANY KNOWS THAT THERE'S A PERMIT FEE.
AGAIN, THAT'S THE CONTRACTOR TO TAKE CARE OF WITH HIM.
AND I DON'T KNOW WHY I'M TAKEN CARE OF, BUT CAN WE, CAN WE DO A POTENTIAL APPROVAL TONIGHT? BECAUSE HE CAN'T START WORK TILL THEY GET THE BUILDING PERMIT PERMIT ANYHOW.
SO EVEN IF YOU GUYS APPROVE IT, THEY CAN'T DO IT UNTIL THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT ISSUES IT PERMIT.
THEY ALSO STILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH ME.
AND THEY HAVE TO GET ENGINEERING APPROVAL THAT WAY WE JUST DON'T HAVE TO BOTHER YOU WITH ANOTHER, WON'T BOTHER WON'T BOTHER IT.
NO BOTHER BE, IT'D PROBABLY BE PRETTY QUICK.
UM, THAT, THAT WAS MY POSITION THAT THEY ASKED US TO NOT DO IT.
BUT IF THERE'S FOUR PEOPLE THAT WE, WE'VE GOT A RESOLUTION, WE CAN MAKE IT A CONDITION.
IF THERE ARE FOUR PEOPLE THAT WANNA DO IT THAT WAY, WE CAN DO IT THAT WAY.
IF THERE'S FOUR PEOPLE THAT THINK WE SHOULD WAIT, THEN WE WAIT.
DID YOU WANT ANY FURTHER RESPONSE TO THE COMMENT THAT LEONA MADE HERE? I DON'T KNOW IF CAM WANTS TO COMMENT ON THE WELL, THE TOWN PARKING LOT OR YOUR THOUGHT ON, YOU'RE THE ENGINEER.
I CAN'T MAKE A COMMENT ON THE YEAH.
DID WE, WE HAVE BEEN PUTTING IN A GRAVEL PARKING LOT.
I, I GUESS THE ONLY COMMENT I REALLY HAVE IS THAT IT IS JUST A GRAVEL PARKING LOT.
IT IS NOT LIKE A PERMEABLE IN THE SENSE OF LIKE A STORMWATER DESIGN PARKING LOT.
THERE'S NO DRAINAGE UNDERNEATH IT OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
UM, AS AN ENGINEER THAT WORKS IN STORM WATER, THAT TYPICALLY IS NOT CONSIDERED PERMEABLE SURFACE.
SO JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT YOU DON'T TAKE THAT WORD PERMEABLE AS, UM, AS, AS, AS A DESIGN FACTOR.
IT IS BASICALLY JUST A GRAVEL PARKING LOT OVER TIME WITH SEDIMENT THAT COMES OFF CARS AND THAT IT TENDS TO PACK FAIRLY SOLID OVER THE YEARS PER GRAVEL, WHICH IS WHY THE STATE DOESN'T ALLOW, UH, DIFFERENCE BETWEEN GRAVEL AND ASPHALT WHEN IT COMES TO STORMWATER DESIGN BECAUSE YOU STILL GET RUNOFF OFF GRAVEL WHEN IT'S BRAND NEW AND FRESHLY PUT, YOU GET MUCH BETTER, YOU KNOW, YOU GET SOME BETTER DRAINAGE THAN YOU WOULD WITH SOLID ASPHALT.
UM, BUT A PERMEABLE SURFACE TYPICALLY HAS SOME KIND OF DRAINAGE UNDERNEATH WHERE IT'S DESIGNED TO ACTUALLY HOLD THE WATER AND DIRECT THE WATER, UM, AND TRY TO INFILTRATE THE WATER MORE INTO THE GROUND.
THIS WAS NOT DONE IN ANY KIND OF DESIGN FASHION FOR THAT PURPOSE.
SO JUST DON'T TAKE IT AS A PERMEABLE SURFACE IN THE SENSE OF, OF THAT.
AND THIS IS ALSO, THAT'S ALSO A PARK, THIS WAS A COMMERCIAL FACILITY WHERE YOU HAVE
[00:25:01]
PEOPLE WALKING IN DIFFERENT TYPES OF SHOES AND THEY HAVE TO PLOW IT ON A REGULAR BASIS.BUT I'M NOT SURE AT GRAVEL, I DON'T EVEN, I'M NOT EVEN SURE THE AMBER COAT ALLOWS A GRAVEL PARKING LOT FOR A, A RESTAURANT LAST THAT WAS TOTALLY, THEY DIDN BECAUSE, UM, ALSO ANTHONY PENAL THE ADDRESSED IN HIS LETTER YEAH.
IN RESPONSE TO THE CAB COMMENTS THAT IN HIS FIRST POINT IT DOES SAY THAT THE SOIL IS ACTUALLY TOO THICK OR WELL, IT, IT'S CLAY SO PERMEABLE.
THE IDEA, THE IDEA OF IN, IN A PERFECT WORLD, IF YOU HAD PERMEABLE ASPHALT OR CONCRETE, IT WOULD INFILTRATE INTO THE GROUND.
SO YOU PUT UNDER GRAINS UNDER THERE TO CATCH THE WATER AND BRING IT TO THE DETENTION BASIN, WHICH WE'RE DOING BASICALLY THE SAME THING.
WE'RE CATCHING THE WATER AND BRINGING IT TO THE BIO RETENTION, WHICH IS CLEANING IT PROBABLY MORE THAN, UH, PERMEABLE BLACKTOP OR CONCRETE WOULD, THEN IT'S GOING INTO THE DETENTION BASIN.
SO IT'S, IT'S, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING IS AN ACCEPTABLE DEC DESIGN METHOD.
AND AGAIN, CAMMY'S GOTTA REVIEW ALL OUR STUFF.
UM, WHAT CAMIE SAID WAS MY, I THINK WE'VE HAD THIS CONVERSATION AT SOME POINT BEFORE WHEN I THIS HAS COME UP, IS THAT GRAVEL DOESN'T COUNT AS PERMEABLE IN EYES OF THE STATE BECAUSE OF THAT YOU JUST SAID THERE AND THAT WAS WHAT I WAS EXACTLY.
AND ALSO TO TOUCH ON THE, THE QUESTION OF APPROVAL, UM, FROM THE, WHAT THE ENGINEERING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT SAID FROM, I WAS AT THAT CONVERSATION AND MY SENSE WAS THEY WOULD BE ALL RIGHT WITH THE CONDITIONAL APPROVAL.
THEY KIND OF JUST WANT THE REFLECTION IN THERE THAT THERE MIGHT BE OUTSTANDING VIOLATIONS THAT SHOULD BE APPROVED.
UM, AND MAYBE CAMMIE CAN SPEAK TO THAT BECAUSE YOU'RE ALSO IN THE DEPARTMENT.
I MEAN I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T GET THE IMPRESSION THAT THEY FELT, FELT IT COULDN'T GO FORWARD WITH THE CONDITION, BUT THEY'RE NOT GONNA LET IT GO ANY FARTHER THAN THAT.
AND NEITHER WILL I IS SINCE ENGINEERING APPROVAL IS THE NEXT STEP, AND ENGINEERING CODE WORK VERY CLOSELY TOGETHER MM-HMM
UM, LET ALONE WOULD THEY ISSUE ANY PERMITS.
BUT, UH, I CAN WORK WITH THEM ON FINAL ENGINEERING APPROVAL AND MAKING SURE THAT THAT'S ADDRESSED BEFORE I ISSUE A LETTER.
THE CODE ALSO DOESN'T SAY THAT YOU CAN'T APPROVE SOMETHING PENDING A STOP WORK ORDER.
I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING IT WITH CONDITIONS TONIGHT.
I THINK THAT, UM, PETITIONER HAS INDICATED THAT HE'S BEEN DELAYED LONG ENOUGH, ESPECIALLY WITH THE LACK OF NOTICE OF THE PAPER, WHO'S NO FAULT OF THE ZONE.
AND I DON'T SEE THAT WE SHOULD REDESIGN THE DRIVE OR THE PARKING LOT EITHER.
THIS IS A, UM, THIS IS A PROJECT THAT'S BEEN IN THE MAKING AND I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BE CALLING FOR DIFFERENT SURFACES OR ANYTHING.
UM, I THINK THAT WE SHOULD MOVE FORWARD SO THIS BUSINESS CAN EXPAND THIS PARKING LOT AND MOVE FORWARD.
I I TAKE THE OPPOSITE OPINION.
THAT'S A DEPARTMENT WITHIN THE, THE TOWN.
AND IF THEY'RE REQUESTING THAT WE DON'T DO ANYTHING, UH, IT, THEY'RE GONNA GET IT SOONER OR LATER.
I WOULD RATHER NOT GO AGAINST THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT, UH, BECAUSE THEY, THEY GOT RULES, THEY GOT REGULATIONS.
AND I THINK WE NEED TO FOLLOW THOSE.
AND ACTUALLY, I, I THINK THAT, THAT I'M NOT, I'M, I'M NOT DONE.
SO THE THING IS, I DON'T WANNA GO AGAINST THEM BECAUSE THAT'S THEIR JOB.
THEY DO THAT DAY IN AND DAY OUT AND IT'S NOT GONNA PUT THE, THE COMPANY OUT OF BUSINESS.
AND IT'S NOT OUR FAULT THAT THEY HAD TO COME BACK HERE BECAUSE OF A BUFFALO NEWS ERROR.
SO THERE, THERE'S NO FAULT ANYWHERE REALLY.
AND IF THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE ASKING, I DON'T SEE HOW WE CAN JUST SAY, SHALL WE CAN FLIP IT OFF.
BECAUSE I THINK THAT IT SHOULD HAVE STATED THAT IN OUR PACKET THAT THEY DIDN'T WANNA BE DUE TO THE, WE WERE SHOWN THE, UM, VIOLATIONS.
AND IF THEY DIDN'T WANT THIS BOARD TO MAKE A DECISION TONIGHT OR TO APPROVE SOMETHING, IT, WE, AS THE BOARD SHOULD HAVE BEEN TOLD THAT BEFORE THE MEETING.
THE VIOLATIONS ARE, THEY ARE, THEY'RE IN THE, THE PACKET.
THE VIOLATIONS ARE IN THE PACKET, BUT NOT THE STATEMENT THAT WE SHOULDN'T IT IS, IT'S IN THE MEMO.
AND THAT'S, AND THAT'S THE MEMO PREPARED BY OUR CONSULTANTS.
THAT'S NOT, AND THAT THAT'S THERE TO HELP US IN, GUIDE US.
IT'S NOT, UH, IT'S NOT AN END ALL BE ALL, BUT WE, OKAY, SO WE'VE GOT, UH, WE, WE'VE GOT, UH, TWO, TWO SIDES, UH, CLEARLY OUTLINED.
WHAT, WHERE'S EVERYBODY ELSE? I DID ASK ANNALISE, THERE WAS NO SUBMISSION FROM ANY OF THE OTHER DEPARTMENTS IN WRITING TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT ASKING NOT TO MAKE A DECISION, MARIO? UM, IT DEPENDS.
SO I WOULD BE IN CINDY'S CAMP THAT WE COULD GO FORWARD WITH CONDITIONS.
BUT NOT IF JEN JUST SAID THE CODE SAYS CAN'T.
NO, I SAID IT DOESN'T SAY THAT.
[00:30:01]
IT DOESN'T SAY THAT YOU CAN'T, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE VIOLATIONS ARE THOUGH.IT'S THE SIGN IT, THE EXPIRATION OF THE BUILDING PERMIT PERMIT, WHICH DOESN'T MAKE A LOT OF SENSE.
THE BUILDING IS BUILT AND OCCUPIED AND THEY HAVE THEIR FINAL CO RIGHT.
AND IS THERE A SIGN SOMETHING IF YOU A SIGN PERMIT, WHICH HE AGREES THAT THEY'LL GET SIGNED, PERMIT IT FOR 30 BUCKS AT THE TIME.
BECAUSE THE WAY WAY HE SIGNED INSTALLATIONS DEPUTIES WORK IS THE SIGNED VENDOR AND THE SIGNED CONTRACTOR HANDLES ALL THE PERMITS AND EVERYTHING.
SO IN THIS CASE, OBVIOUSLY THE CONTRACTOR DIDN'T GET THE PERMIT, WHICH BOB SAID HE'D BE WILLING TO GO PAY 30 BUCKS ONCE THEY MM-HMM.
CLARIFIED THAT, THAT THAT'S THE AMOUNT THAT THEY YEAH, I FEEL LIKE THE PARKING LOT EXPANSION IS NOT CONNECTED TO THE BUILDING ITSELF.
SO, AND CAMMY'S SITTING HERE AND SHE'S ONE CHECK ON THE SYSTEM AND THEN THERE'S OTHER CHECKS.
SO I WOULD BE FINE WITH APPROVING THE CONDITIONS.
THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT WON'T GIVE US BUILDING PERMIT UNTIL WE CLEAN THAT STUFF UP ANYHOW.
IT SEEMS COMMON SENSE SEEMS THEY CANNOT MOVE AHEAD WITHOUT, UM, APPROVING FROM THE OTHER DEPARTMENT.
I WILL RELY ON MIA'S CHECKS AND BALANCES IN THE, THE CODE ENFORCEMENT.
I THINK AS LONG AS IT'S SPECIFICALLY LISTED AS CONDITION, I WOULD BE OKAY WITH MOVING FORWARD.
UH, WHEREAS THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING DEPARTMENT RECEIVED A SITE PLAN APPLICATION FROM JOHNSON'S LANDING INCORPORATED TO EXPAND THEIR PARKING LOT FROM 134 SPACES TO 204 SPACES AT 40 40 LAKE SHORE ROAD.
AND WHEREAS THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD HELD THE REQUIRED PUBLIC HEARING, AND WHEREAS THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD HAS REVIEWED THE PROJECT AGAINST TOWN CODE HAS RECEIVED INPUT FROM TOWN DEPARTMENTS AND OTHER AGENCIES HAS RECEIVED ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REPORTS FROM THE APPLICANT AND PROVIDED INPUT TO THE APPLICANT THAT HAS RESULTED IN AMENDED PLANS ADDRESSING THE PLANNING BOARD'S CONCERNS.
AND WHEREAS IN ACCORDANCE WITH PART 6 1 7 OF THE IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS PERTAINING TO ARTICLE EIGHT STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW ACT OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION LAW, THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROJECT IS A TYPE TWO ACTION AND NO FURTHER SEEKER ANALYSIS IS REQUIRED.
AND NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD ISSUES CONDITIONAL SITE PLAN OF APPROVAL FOR THIS PROJECT WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS.
ONE APPROVAL IS CONTINGENT UPON THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT COMMENT LETTER DATED DECEMBER 1ST, 2023.
TWO, THE FINAL LANDSCAPING PLAN WILL BE APPROVED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
THREE LIGHTING SHALL BE DARK SKY COMPLIANT AS SHOWN ON THE PLANS.
FOUR SIDEWALKS ARE WAIVED AS THEY ALREADY EXIST.
ANY OUTSTANDING BUILDING OR CODE VIOLATIONS WILL BE RECTIFIED.
SO THAT IS A MOTION BY BILL, SECOND BY SECOND.
NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS A PUBLIC HEARING REVIVE WESLEYAN CHURCH REQUESTING PRELIMINARY PLA APPROVAL OF A TWO LOT SUBDIVISION TO BE LOCATED AT 5 0 4 2 PARKER ROAD.
SO THIS IS THE WESLEYAN CHURCH DEFENDANT BEFORE IS ONE FOUR.
THEY WANT TO SUBDIVIDE THEIR LAND.
THE CHURCH OWNS APPROXIMATELY 80 ACRES, PRIMARILY THE CORNER OF MCKINLEY AND BAYVIEW.
THERE'S A SECTION THAT STRETCHES OVER TO PARKER ROAD THAT HAS TWO STORY, THREE BEDROOM HOUSE ON IT.
WE'D LIKE TO SEPARATE THAT INTO A HALF LOT AND THEN SELL THAT HOUSE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS BEFORE WE START THE PUBLIC HEARING? NOPE.
NEED THE NOTICE, PLEASE? UH, LET MAKE SURE I GOT THE RIGHT LINE.
NOTICES HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD WILL CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING ON A PROPOSAL OF REVIVE WESLEYAN CHURCH TO SUBDIVIDE APPROXIMATELY 0.5 ACRES FROM 79 ACRES OWNED BY THE CHURCH AT 5 0 4 2 PARKER ROAD.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD ON DECEMBER 6TH, 2023 AT 7:00 PM IN ROOM SEVEN B OF HAMBURG TOWN HAWK.
ALRIGHT, THIS TIME I'LL OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING.
WAS THERE ANYONE THAT WANTED TO SPEAK ON THIS PROJECT OVER HERE? SO BE BETTER.
ANYONE HERE THAT WANTED TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE CHURCH SUBDIVISION FOR THE THIRD AND FINAL TIME? ANY COMMENTS ON THE WESLEYAN CHURCH REQUEST
[00:35:01]
FOR SUBDIVISION BEING NO COMMENTS.I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
WE HAVE A LOGISTICAL QUESTION THAT MAYBE CAN MAKE
THEY ALREADY REMOVED ONE HOUSE.
SO THIS IS THE SECOND SUBDIVISION.
DO WE NEED A FINAL PLAT APPROVAL BECAUSE THIS IS THE SECOND HOUSE BEING SUBDIVIDED OUT OR NOT? NO, IT'S OKAY.
THEY, THEY GET AROUND THAT BY DOING IT ONE AT A TIME.
AND THIS IS NOT A SUBDIVISION IN THE SENSE OF WHAT WOULD THAT PROTECTS AGAINST IS THE LARGER ONES WHO WANNA THEN BUILD LIKE MULTIPLE HOMES AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
THIS IS, THIS IS REALLY ABOUT SUBDIVIDING IN EXISTING HOMES AND MAKING, MAKING SEPARATE LOTS, WHICH YOU COULD ALMOST SAY THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE THAT WAY IN THE BEGINNING.
SO THIS IS, THIS IS A, A BETTER WAY TO HAVE THE LAYOUTS OF LOTS.
SO I, I'D STILL SAY TO, I'D STILL RECOMMEND WAIVING THE, BUT OKAY, THANK YOU.
AND I'LL JUST ADD THAT WHEN WE HAD DISCUSSIONS ON THE CELL TOWER ON THIS SITE, SOME OF THE NEIGHBORS EXPRESSED CONCERNS ABOUT THE UPKEEP FOR THESE HOMES.
SO I THINK THE CHURCH SUBDIVIDING AND SELLING THEM MAKES IT EASIER FOR THESE BUILDINGS TO BE PLACED IN THE HANDS OF SOMEBODY WHO'S GONNA MAINTAIN THEM.
SO THE NEIGHBORS WON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT IT AS MUCH.
BUT, UH, SO I'LL DO THE RESOLUTION SEEKER IN ACCORDANCE WITH NEW YORK STATE SEEKER LAW.
THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD HAS REVIEWED THE TWO LAST SUBDIVISION PROPOSED BY REVIVE WESLEYAN CHURCH TO BE LOCATED AT 5 0 4 2 PARKER ROAD.
BASED ON THE PRELIMINARY PLAT AND REVIEW OF THE SUBMITTED MATERIALS AND INPUT FROM OTHER DEPARTMENTS, THE PLANNING BOARD HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION IS NOT ANTICIPATED TO RESULT IN ANY SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT.
AND THAT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS HEREBY ISSUED AND THE PLANNING BOARD CHAIRMAN IS AUTHORIZED TO SIGN THE EAF, WHICH WILL ACT AS THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION THAT IS RESOLUTION BY BILL.
ARE THERE SIDEWALKS ON THIS SITE? THERE ARE NOT.
NO, THERE ARE NOT PARKER ROAD.
AND I THINK THE DISCUSSION BEFORE WHEN WE DID THIS THE LAST TIME, I DON'T THINK IT WAS ON PARKER ROAD LAST TIME.
WELL, THERE ARE NO SIDEWALKS ON PARKER ROAD.
AND I THINK THAT THE PROBLEM IS, IS THIS CONTINUOUS, WELL, I MEAN, I'M HAPPY IF WE WANNA PUT THEM IN, BUT BECAUSE IT'S A SINGLE RESIDENCE AND NOT A BUSINESS, IT SEEMS LIKE A UNDUE BURDEN TO HAVE ONE HOUSE HAVE TO PUT THEM IN AND THE NEXT TO THE OTHER RESIDE.
I THOUGHT THAT'S WHAT WE HAD DISCUSSED THE LAST SEEMS AT SOME POINT WE DISCUSSED THAT IT WOULDN'T BEEN ON THIS PROJECT.
WHAT I THINK WE TALKED ABOUT THAT IF THE CHURCH, WE THOUGHT WE'D GET THE CHURCH TO DO THE WHOLE FRENCH JUMBO SIDES, THAT WOULD BE IDEAL.
BUT, UM, MCKINLEY AND MM-HMM
I THINK WE WANTED THAT LAST TIME YOU SAID YOU DIDN'T WANT PEOPLE WALKING ON MCKINLEY, THAT THERE WAS BAYVIEW.
I THINK ONE OF THE, SO MCKINLEY IS A COUNTY ROAD THERE OR A STATE ROAD? COUNTY ROAD.
WE LOOK AT YOU LIKE YOU'RE THE SAME ENCYCLOPEDIA DREW DOWNLOADED INTO YOUR HEAD.
[00:40:07]
YEAH, I THINK THAT WE, I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW THAT I, I DON'T THINK WE BY ANY MEANS MADE A FINAL DETERMINATION ON IT, BUT I THINK WE DID DISCUSS LIKE SIDEWALKS ALONG MCKINLEY FROM THAT ONE DRIVEWAY CONTINUING ON BAYVIEW TO THE OTHER DRIVEWAY.WE DON'T HAVE THE MINUTES IN THE IT WOULDN'T, THAT WOULD'VE BEEN TWO MEETINGS HERE.
IT WAS LAST DISCUSSED NOVEMBER 1ST.
WELL, AND I THINK IT'S JUST SOMETHING WE DISCUSSED.
NOT ANYTHING THAT WE VOTED ON OR CAME TO CONSENSUS ON.
SO, QUESTION SIDEWALKS OR NO SIDEWALKS.
MY BROTHER HAS A KIDS WALKING ON SIDEWALKS IN THE STREET.
ALRIGHT, SO THAT'S, ARE WE TALKING SIDEWALKS ON BAYVIEW? UH, OR MCKINLEY? MCKINLEY.
SO THERE'S, THERE'S A DRIVE THROUGH THERE.
THERE'S A DRIVEWAY THAT GOES TO THE HUB ON MCKINLEY.
AND THEN THERE'S A DRIVEWAY THAT GOES INTO THE CHURCH ON BAYVIEW.
AND WHAT I AM TALKING ABOUT IS SIDEWALKS THAT GO FROM THAT DRIVEWAY TO THE OTHER ONE.
IS IT POSSIBLE TO PULL AN AERIAL MAP THROUGH AN AERIAL MAP OF THIS, RIGHT? YEAH, I, THEY PULL IT UP ON MY PHONE, BUT SO I COULD WORK EVERYBODY OPEN GOOGLE MAPSS.
THE THINK, SO YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT GOING FROM ONE DRIVEWAY TO THE OTHER, BUT YOU DON'T WANT 'EM TO GO TO ALL THE WAY TO THE PROPERTY LINE BY HIDDEN HOLLOW HIDDEN HOLLOWS.
WHAT, ONE NORTH? YEAH, THAT'S, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE THE RIGHT, THAT'S THAT, UH, HIDDEN LAKE.
HIDDEN HOLLOW, YOU KNOW, FROM THE ON I, I DO.
UM, I MEAN THAT'S JUST, I MEAN, THERE IS SOME, MY B***H, WHERE IS PARKER?
THE, YOU GOTTA GO ALL THE WAY DOWN.
PARKER IS ALL THE WAY OVER HERE.
SO PARKER'S ALL THE WAY DOWN HERE.
THE PROBLEM WITH THIS PART IS HOW DO YOU GET OVER RUSH CREEK? 'CAUSE I REMEMBER TALKING ABOUT THAT AT ONE WAY HOW YOU GET OVER RUSH CREEK.
SO WE COULD GO OVER LIKE THE DRIVEWAY DRIVEWAY, BUT I WOULD SAY YOU'D WANNA GO TO THE PROPERTY LINE ON MCKINLEY.
AND DO WE KNOW IF THERE'S A BUS STOP NEAR THERE? THERE'S NOT.
IT'S WAY, IT'S WAY FARTHER DOWN.
THE BUS STOP IS SO WHERE IN THIS AREA IS THE HOUSE COMPARED TO THE MAIN BUILDING OF THE CHURCH? RIGHT.
IT'S IT'S WAY OVER BOB PARKER.
IT'S ON THE BACK SIDE NEXT TO THE DRIVEWAY.
IT'S THE ONE THAT'S NEXT TO THE DRIVEWAY.
AND SO YOU'RE SUGGESTING ADDING SIDEWALKS ON THE THE HOUSE.
THE HOUSE ISN'T GONNA BE ON ALL OF IT.
BUT THE PARCEL THAT'S BEING SUBDIVIDED, WE ARE DISCUSSING THE ENTIRE PARCEL IN THE SUBDIVISION.
SO WE CAN CONSIDER THINGS THAT ARE ON THE PARCEL AND WE WOULD'VE TO WAIVE SIDEWALKS.
AND TO AN EXTENT WE WOULD BE WAIVING BECAUSE THEIR CODE FOR US TO IMPROVE THE SUBDIVISION HERE WOULD REQUIRE SIDEWALKS HERE DOWN TO WHEREVER THEIR PROPERTY LINE IS.
AND I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH THEY OWN ON, ON ROAD.
THE PROPERTY LINE ENDS RIGHT HERE.
AND THEN CUTS ACROSS, CUTS BACK AND GOES TO THERE.
AND THEN GOES UP HOW FAR? JUST THE WIDTH OF THIS LOCK RIGHT HERE.
SO IT'S JUST THE OTHER SIDE OF THE CELL TOWER.
SO THERE'S, YOU LITERALLY HAVE THIS TOWER, YOU KNOW, SARAH LOVES IT WHEN WE DO THAT IN THE MINUTES, SARAH, FOR THE MINUTES.
WE WERE SHOWING THE PROPERTY BOUNDARIES WHERE THE END IS ON MCKINLEY CAR PARK LAKE, WHERE THE END IS ON,
[00:45:01]
UH, SOLES ADJACENT TO THE HOUSE THAT THE PREVIOUSLY SUBDIVIDED.AND THEN IT CUTS ACROSS ALONG THE CELL PHONE, TOWER ROAD TO PARKER ROAD.
AND THERE'S JUST ONE HOUSE AND THE DRIVEWAY THAT ARE THE WIDTH OF PARKER ROAD.
SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT INSTEAD OF WAVING ALL OF THE SIDEWALKS, WELL, I GUESS YOU'RE SAYING INSTEAD OF DEFAULTING TO WHAT THE CODE WOULD SUGGEST IN THAT WE WOULD PUT SIDEWALKS ON ALL THE FRONTAGE, THAT WE WOULD ONLY DO SIDEWALKS ON THE FRONT SIDE OF THE FRONT.
ANYBODY'S GETTING A DIFFERENT ONE.
IF ANYBODY, I MEAN, IF MOST PEOPLE DON'T LIKE IT, THEN WE DON'T DO IT.
MOST PEOPLE WANT SOMETHING DIFFERENT THEN WE DO THAT.
BUT THAT'S WHAT I'M, THAT'S WE'VE, THAT'S WHAT I'M FOR.
YOU'RE SUGGESTING TO GO I'M SUGGESTING, OOPS, SORRY, GO AHEAD.
HERE'S THE DRIVEWAY THAT GOES TO THE HUB HERE IS KIND OF BLURRY, BUT, BUT HERE'S THE DRIVEWAY THAT GOES TO THE CHURCH.
THAT'S WHAT I'M SUGGESTING FOR SIDEWALKS.
WE HAVE ASKED, SO ON SOULS ROAD, UM, KIND OF RIGHT WHERE IT SAYS COGGINS PUB ON THERE, WE DOUBLED DOWN ON PUTTING SIDEWALKS IN THERE.
AND I THINK THAT WE ALSO HAVE, IF THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO WORK WITH HILBERT WOULD'VE WANTED THEM TO GO ALL THE WAY UP TO ROSETTA.
SO IF WE ARE WORKING, AND THAT WOULD THEN CONNECT FROM THAT CIRCLE AND THE SIDEWALKS ON SOUTH PARK THAT WOULD, WE'RE WORKING OUR WAY TOWARDS LINKAGE, TOWARDS PROVIDE, AND, AND IT'S, HERE'S WHERE THE GIRL GOT HIT BY A CAR ON THE SCOOTER.
SO THERE'S, I MEAN, THERE'S NO SIDEWALKS ANYWHERE IN HERE, BUT IT'S AN AREA WHERE WE REALLY HAVE TO START HITTING 'EM.
THE PAINTERS, IF WE'RE GONNA PUT THEM, I WOULD PROPOSE THAT INSTEAD OF STOPPING AT THE DRIVEWAY FOR THE HUB, THAT WE CAN CONTINUE UP TO THE, I GUESS THAT'S THE NORTHERN PROPERTY LINE TOWARDS HIDDEN HOLLOW.
WE CONTINUE TO THE EDGE OF THE PROPERTY THERE.
OO ONLY BECAUSE OF THEIR PEOPLE COMING FROM THAT COMMUNITY OR THAT AREA.
I THINK THERE'S LIKE A LITTLE TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENT MAYBE RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET THERE.
BUT THEN THEY HAVE, UH, SIDEWALKS ON REVIVED PROPERTY TO THE EDGE.
UM, OR START WITH CINDY THIS TIME.
WHAT ARE YOUR IDEAS? WHAT ARE, WHAT ARE YOU THINKING AS REGARD TO THE SIDEWALKS? WELL, I THINK I SUPPORT YOUR IDEA FOR IN FRONT OF THE CHURCH WHAT YOU PROPOSED.
I DON'T SEE GOING TO HIDDEN HOLLOW.
WELL, IT WOULDN'T GO ALL THE WAY TO HOLLOW WOULD GO TO THEIR PRO.
SO, SO WHAT IT WOULD SAY UNDER KAITLIN'S PROPOSAL WAS SIDEWALKS ALONG MCKINLEY AND ALONG BAYVIEW BETWEEN MCKINLEY AND THE DRIVEWAY TO THE CHURCH.
UM, UNDER MINE IT WOULD SAY ALONG MCKINLEY FROM THE DRIVEWAY AT THE HUB TO ALONG BAYVIEW.
SO AS FAR WAS THE, ARE WE STOPPING AT THE DRIVEWAY? IF THIS MEANT TO ENCROACH AND APPROVE THE PEDESTRIAN ACCESS, WHAT IS THE VALUE OF THE DRIVEWAY? ODD MCKINLEY AT THE DEMARCATION OF THE PROPERTY.
RIGHT? I I, YEAH, I GET YOUR YOUR POINT.
I MEAN THAT THAT IS MY QUESTION IS WHY WOULD YOU PICK THAT? SO, BECAUSE JUST A PIECE THAT STICKS OUT AND GOES NOWHERE, THAT'S ALL.
BUT THE GOAL IS ULTIMATELY THEN RIGHT.
TO HAVE SOMEBODY ELSE CONNECT TO IT.
AND IF YOU ARE GONNA HAVE A GAP, WHAT'S THE, WHO'S GONNA BE RESPONSIBLE FOR IT? SO, I MEAN, THAT'S THE POINT, RIGHT? IS YOU GOTTA FILL THE GAPS.
YOU GOTTA AT LEAST, WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT MY COUNTER? I'M JUST, I'M PUTTING EVERYTHING OUT THERE TO FIGURE OUT WHAT IS YOUR PROPOSAL AGAIN? YEAH.
DON'T YOUR INSTEAD OF
SO THAT YOU DO THE SAME THING AS BILL PLUS THAT TO NOT LEAVE A ORAGE YARD, YOU'RE SAYING FROM PROPERTY LINE TO PROPERTY LINE, CORRECT? WELL, NO, FROM PROPERTY LINE TO THE DRIVEWAY.
BECAUSE FROM PROPERTY LINE TO PROPERTY LINE, THEY'D HAVE TO BUILD A BRIDGE OVER CREEK.
BECAUSE THERE'S RUSH CREEK CUTS THROUGH HERE.
AND I DON'T THINK WE WANNA, I THINK THE ODDS OF US GETTING ANY INTERCONNECTIONS IN THE NEAR TERM WITHOUT THE TOWN INTERVENTION ARE LOW.
AND THAT YOU'D BE BETTER OFF GOING TO THE DRIVEWAY FOR NOW AND THEN FIGURING OUT WHAT THE PLAN IS.
BECAUSE PROBABLY RUSH CREEK, IF IT REQUIRE PERMITS AND OTHER THINGS, THEY PROBABLY HAVE TO CHOP DOWN TREES TO PUT THE SIDEWALK ALONG THE CREEK.
[00:50:01]
THAT WAS THE DISCUSSION THAT WE HAD BEFORE AROUND THAT AREA THAT IT'S FREQUENT.SO, BUT I WOULD CONCUR WITH, UM, KAITLYN'S SUGGESTION THAT RIGHT.
UM, ARNOLD, CAITLIN, DID YOU SUGGEST JUST THE FRONT OF THE CHURCH OR TO HIT HOLLOW, A HIDDEN HOLLOW? WELL, AS FAR AS THE PROPERTY LINE IT TOWARDS HIDDEN HOLLOW ALL THE WAY BACK DOWN TO THE DRIVEWAY AND SOLES AROUND THE CORNER.
THE FRONTAGE, BOTH FRONTAGE ON MCKINLEY AND THEN BAYVIEW.
UM, ANY SIDEWALKS WE CAN GET, UM, ON MCKINLEY AND BAYVIEW? I'M IN SUPPORT OF, BECAUSE IT'S TREACHEROUS.
YOU WANNA GO NEXT? I WAS GONNA GO TO DAN.
DAN, I'M, I'M A LITTLE TORN BECAUSE SIDEWALKS HAS BEEN PUT IN A LONG TIME.
BUT, YOU KNOW, REALISTICALLY, AND IT'S OUT OF, UH, THE BIG PROJECT FOR IT IS AN UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE OF PARCELING UP THE UH, PIECE.
BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE NEED TO, UH, CONTINUE OUR SIDEWALK EFFORTS IN THE TOWN.
SO I WOULD, I WOULD SUPPORT KAITLIN'S DECISION OR RECOMMENDATION.
DO YOU SUPPORT YOUR OWN RECOMMENDATION? I GUESS, I MEAN, MEAN WOULD BE DIFFICULT.
I COULD REJECT MY OWN, BUT NO, I AGREE WITH MINE.
SO I HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS, I GUESS.
WELL, DENNIS, YOU, DO YOU HAVE A COMMENT THAT YOU WANNA MAKE BEFORE THEN OR NO? NO.
SO THIS WOULD BE THE CHURCH'S RESPONSIBILITY TO PUT THE SIDEWALK IN AND MAINTAIN IT, IS I'M UNDERSTANDING THAT CORRECTLY.
AND I UNDERSTAND YOU HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO MAKE THAT DECISION, BUT IS THAT WHENEVER A PIECE OF PROPERTY IS SOLD OR JUST SUBDIVIDED, SO TO CONTINUE THE SIDEWALKS DOWN, MCKINLEY, THEY WOULD'VE TO BE SUBDIVIDED FOR SIDEWALKS TO GO IN OR EVERY TIME A PIECE OF PROPERTY IS SOLD, YOU WOULD'VE THE EVERY TIME THEY CAME HERE FOR SOMETHING.
IF THEY WANTED TO GET A SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR SOMETHING, YES.
UM, IF IT'S SOLD, THAT DOESN'T COME TO US.
SO EVERY TIME CENTRAL USE PERMIT, YEAH.
BUT IF THEY, IF THEY WERE TO CHANGE THE USE, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
SO THE LIKELIHOOD OF THE SIDEWALK BEING CONTINUED DOWN, MCKINLEY IS ONLY FOR SPECIAL USE PERMIT FROM, SO THERE'S TWO PIECES OF IT.
ONE IS THAT THEY COME IN FRONT OF US.
THE SECOND IS, IS THAT THE TOWN IS GONNA BE TEARING WHERE'S DREW WHEN I NEED HIM? AND TEARING OFF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, I BELIEVE A PEDESTRIAN ACCESS PLAN.
AND IT'S GONNA BE TARGETING CERTAIN AREAS BECAUSE OF THE, THE, THE INTEREST IN HAVING 'EM AS WELL AS THE DEMAND AND THEN THE SAFETY.
YOU KNOW, WE DID HAVE THAT, UH, FATALITIES THAT WAS, UH, NON-MOTORIZED.
RIGHT? SO SOMETHING, SOMETHING CAME IN AROUND THAT NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WAS CHANGING THAT NEIGHBORHOOD FOR A SUBDIVISION, YOU MIGHT END UP WITH A SMALL GAP, WHICH IS A LOT BETTER THAN WHAT WE HAVE NOW, WHICH IS NONE IN A SMALL GAP.
THERE MAY BE OTHER THINGS TO THAT AREN'T THE PLANNING BOARD TO ADDRESS IT.
SO THERE'S, THERE'S THINGS THE TOWN WANTS TO DO TO ADD SIDEWALKS.
THERE'S THINGS THAT WE CAN DO TO HELP HERE IN THE PLANNING BOARD, BUT IT'S NOT SOMETHING WE CAN DO BY OURSELVES.
SO THIS ONE WE CAN, BUT AS FAR AS TO GET SIDEWALKS ALL ALONG, MCKINLEY, WE, WE CAN'T DO THAT JUST WITH US.
WE CAN ONLY DO IT PIECE BY PIECE AS THINGS COME IN FRONT OF US AND THE TOWN REQUIRES THE SIDEWALKS, BUT ALLOWS THE PLANNING BOARD TO WAVE THEM.
SO WHEN WE DO THE SUBDIVISION, WE ARE ALLOWED TO WAIVE THEM AND WE'RE GOING TO WAIVE THEM ON PARKER AND THE PART OF BAYVIEW.
UH, BUT, BUT BASICALLY WHAT WE'RE DECIDING TO DO IS TO NOT WAIVE THE REQUIREMENT OF SIDEWALKS IN THOSE OTHER PARTS.
IT PROBABLY MAKES THE SUB LOT, UM, FINANCIALLY, UM, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'LL WORK, BUT, SO IT IS A BIG SIDEWALK.
YEAH, IT IS A VERY LARGE SIDEWALK.
SO WE PROBABLY, I MEAN, THE OPPORTUNITY TO PUT THAT HOUSE BACK INTO TAX, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT PLAYS ANY TAX ROLE OR, UM, I THINK THE, I THINK IF THIS BOARD HAD BEEN IN PLACE AT THE TIME THAT THE REVIVED CAMPUS WAS PUT INTO PLACE, 'CAUSE IT'S A HUGE DEVELOPMENT, THERE PROBABLY WOULD'VE BEEN SIDEWALKS AT THE TIME, BUT I, OH YEAH, WE WOULD'VE, WE WOULD'VE PUT SIDEWALKS IN THERE, BUT THAT WAS, IT WOULD'VE BEEN THERE FOR QUITE SOME TIME AS WELL BEFORE, FOR SOME TIME SINCE BEEN BEEN THERE FOR DECADES.
[00:55:01]
GET SOMETHING IN WRITING, I'M ASSUME.YEAH, I'M, I'M GONNA DO THE RESOLUTION HERE.
RESOLUTION HERE, THEY'RE THE ONLY, THE ONE DRIVEWAY ON BAYVIEW? CORRECT.
UH, THE HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD HEREBY GRANTS PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR THE REVIVE WESLEYAN CHURCH TWO LOT SUBDIVISION WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS AND WAIVERS.
ONE, THE INSTALLATION OF SIDEWALKS IS WAIVED ONLY ON BAYVIEW, SOUTH OF THE DRIVEWAY AND ON PARKER SIDEWALKS ARE REQUIRED ON MCKINLEY AND ON BAYVIEW BETWEEN MCKINLEY AND THE DRIVEWAY.
TWO APPROVAL IS CONTINGENT UPON THE COMMENTS IN THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MEMO DATED DECEMBER 1ST, 2023.
FINALLY THAT THE PLANNING BOARD, THERE IS NO ENGINEERING MEMO FOR A TWO LOT SUBDIVISION.
IT WAS IN MY, MY PRE-ACTIVE THING HERE.
THE HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD WAIVES THE COMPLETION OF THE FINAL PLAT, AND THE HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD CHAIRMAN IS AUTHORIZED TO SIGN THE PRELIMINARY PLAT ONCE THE TOWN ENGINEERS SIGN OFF ON THE PLAT AS A MOTION BY BILL SECOND BY DENNIS.
NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS, OH YEAH.
WILLIAM NOLAN REQUESTING PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL OF A TWO LOT SUBDIVISION LOCATED AT 4 5 9 6 LAKE AVENUE.
AND THIS IS LAKE AVENUE, NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH BLAKE STREET NEAR THE VILLAGE.
IS THIS A BLA IS THIS IN BLAZEDALE? WELL, NEAR BLAZE, I DON'T KNOW.
IS THIS CODE OKAY, THE OTHER SIDE?
ANY UH, QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON THIS ONE? NO, I DON'T THINK SO.
THIS IS ONE THAT THERE'S ONE LOT HAS A HOUSE ON IT AND THEN THE OTHER LOT DOES NOT.
AND NEITHER WOULD REQUIRE ZONING VARIANCES.
YOU MEET ALL THE REQUIREMENTS.
AND THE, THERE'S A DRIVEWAY FOR THE EXISTING HOUSE AND NO CURRENT CURB CUT FOR THE VACANT LOT, RIGHT? CORRECT.
IS THERE, IS THERE A FLAG LOT BEHIND THIS ONE OR IS THAT PART OF THIS OR ORIGINAL ONE? I MEAN, THE HOUSE HAS BEEN THERE FOR A LONG TIME.
THERE IS A, UM, WHAT IS, WHAT'S IN BEHIND THERE? UH, I'D SAY A, A GROUP HOME.
SO YEAH, THEY, THEY OWN THE ENTIRE LOT BEHIND IT.
SO, SO THEY'VE GOT LIKE A FLAG LOT BEHIND IT? YEAH.
TO THE LEFT OF THE HOUSE IS ACTUALLY THE DRIVEWAY GOING IN AND THE HOUSE HAS A LITTLE, YOU KNOW, TURNAROUND.
YOU CAN USE THE, THE DRIVEWAY ACCESS TO THE BACK TO PULL ON THE, MAKE IT LIKE A YOUR DRIVEWAY.
UH, ANY, WE WANNA TALK ABOUT SIDEWALKS BEFORE OR AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARING
HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD WILL CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING ON A PROPOSAL FOR A TWO LOT SUBDIVISION BY WILLIAM, NO NOLAN, TO BE LOCATED AT 4 5 9 6
[01:00:01]
LAKE AVENUE.THE PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD ON DECEMBER 6TH, 2023 AT 7:00 PM IN ROOM SEVEN B OF THE HAMBURG TOWN HALL.
AT THIS TIME I'LL OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING.
IS THERE ANYBODY THAT HAD ANY COMMENTS ON THE WILLIAM NOLAN SUBDIVISION FOR THE SECOND TIME? ANYBODY THAT WANTED TO SPEAK FOR AGAINST THIS PROJECT FOR THE THIRD AND FINAL TIME? NO COMMENTS AT THE TIME.
I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING SUCCESSFULLY ONLINE.
LESLIE LOWERY GAVE US A WAVE
SO, IN ACCORDANCE WITH NEW YORK STATE SECRET LAW, THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD HAS REVIEWED THE TWO LAWS SUBDIVISION PROPOSED BY WILLIAM DOLAN TO BE LOCATED AT 4 5 9 6 LAKE AVENUE.
BASED ON THE PRELIMINARY PLAT REVIEW OF THE SUBMITTED MATERIALS AND INPUT FROM OTHER DEPARTMENTS, THE PLANNING BOARD HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION IS NOT ANTICIPATED TO RESULT IN ANY SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT.
AND THEN A NEGATIVE DECLARATIONS HEREBY ISSUE.
AND THE PLANNING BOARD CHAIRMAN IS AUTHORIZED TO SIGN THE EAF, WHICH WILL ACT AS A NEGATIVE DECLARATION.
SO SAME THING AS THEY INDICATED, THIS IS IN TOWN OF HAMBURG.
SO IN BLAZE HILLS, MAYBE THE OTHER WAY AROUND, WE'D HAVE TO REQUIRE SIDEWALKS.
UM, BUT THE TOWN, WE WOULD HAVE TO DECIDE IF WE WERE GOING TO WAVE THEM.
HOW CLOSE IS THIS TO WHERE WE'VE HAD THE PEDESTRIAN FATALITIES? ABOUT A MILE.
THREE QUARTERS OF A MILE, BUT ROUGHLY.
SO THIS WOULD BE NORTH OF MILE STRIP? YES.
UM, IF IT'S OF INTEREST TO YOU GUYS, WE ARE WORKING ON A CORRIDOR STUDY FOR LAKE GAP BETWEEN SOUTH PARK AND MCKINLEY.
SO WE ARE GONNA BE LOOKING AT COMPLETE STREETS INTERVENTIONS.
AND THIS IS, THIS IS EAST OF MCKINLEY.
SO IT'S JUST, IT'S A BLOCK AWAY FROM WHERE WE'RE LOOKING AT IT.
OH, WHAT DO, SORRY, JUST CONFIRMING.
OH, ARE THERE SIDEWALKS? OH, WELL, NO, IT'S, THERE'S NO SIDEWALKS AT ALL BETWEEN THE LEY AND, UH, ABBOT ROAD.
THERE'S A NICE GUTTER ROOM SYSTEM THERE.
IS THAT A TOWN ROAD? NO, ERIE COUNTY.
THIS AERIAL MAP IS ACTUALLY, COULD PROBABLY USE A REPAY MAIL.
DO YOU GUYS HAVE PULL IT UP? NO.
UH, THERE ARE SIDEWALKS ON CLEARWAY, WHICH IS RIGHT AROUND THE CORNER.
AND THERE IS A BUS STOP RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET CORNER OF LAKE AVENUE AND BEFORD.
BUT IT LOOKS LIKE IT MIGHT BE ONE OF THOSE GROUP HOMES WHERE YEAH, THEY GOT A BUNCH OF VANS IN THE PARKING LOT, SO I DON'T KNOW HOW, BUT THERE ARE ALSO OTHER SIDEWALKS RIGHT NEARBY.
ALL RIGHT, WELL WE'LL GO THE OTHER DIRECTION, MARGO.
SIDEWALKS OR NO SIDE? I'M ALWAYS FOR SIDEWALKS.
WAIT, I SAID, OH MA'AM, BECAUSE I DON'T, I DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER TO THIS ONE.
AND I DON'T KNOW THIS, THE CHURCH IS ON A CORNER AND IS AT CAMPUS AND IS LIKE A, COULD REALLY USE A PEDESTRIAN BOOST AND THEY'RE A LARGE ESTABLISHMENT.
THIS IS LIKE A SINGLE HOME ON A SINGLE RESIDENTIAL STREET THAT SEEMS OH, TO MAKE A LITTLE LESS SENSE TO ME, BUT WOULDN'T BE TWO HOMES, BUT YES.
UM, WOULD THAT BE SOMETHING WHEN THEY GO TO, BECAUSE WE'RE JUST SELLING THE LAND, SOMEBODY ELSE IS GONNA BUY IT AND IMPROVE IT AFTER, WHEN THEY GO TO PULL THEIR PERMIT TO PUT THE NEW
[01:05:01]
HOUSE ON REQUIRED THE SIDEWALK AT THAT TIME? I THINK THE CONCERN MIGHT BE IS THE CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES GOING ONTO THIS LOT MAY RUIN THE EXISTING.IF WE HAD TO PUT THE EXISTING SIDEWALK IN FOR THE VACANT LAND PORTION, IT MAY RUIN THAT SIDEWALK AND HAVE TO GET REPLACED ALL OVER.
YOU KNOW, ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
CAMMY, IF WE REQUIRE SIDEWALKS, DOES IT HAVE TO GO IN BEFORE IT'S SUBDIVIDED OR CAN IT GO IN WITH CONSTRUCTION? OH YEAH.
'CAUSE YOU NEED PUT A CURB CUT AND STUFF, AN ANSWER FOR THAT.
BECAUSE TYPICALLY WHEN YOU REQUIRE THE SIDEWALK, IT'S FOR A LARGE SUBDIVISION AND THEY DO THE RIGHT OF WAY AND THE ROAD AND EVERYTHING ALL AT ONCE.
I DON'T KNOW, FOR SUCH A, FOR TOO LONG THAT WE'D HAVE TO LOOK AT IT A LITTLE CLOSER TO, TO TELL YOU THAT, HOW IT WOULD BE REQUIRED.
UM, AND WE CAN, WE CAN MAYBE ADDRESS THAT AND THING.
SO, UM, SO WE, WE DID A, DENNIS MARIO MADE HER COMMENT, BUT DIDN'T SAY WHICH SIDE SHE WAS GOING.
I THINK MORE IN FAVOR OF NO VERSUS YES.
BECAUSE IT JUST SEEMS A LITTLE IMPRACTICAL, BUT I HATE NOT INCLUDING SIDEWALKS.
UNDER THE CIRCUM CIRCUMSTANCE, I AM IN FAVOR OF SIDEWALKS.
I UNDERSTAND THE NEED AND THE INCREASE OF LACK OF SAFETY IN THE COMMUNITY, BUT I THINK THAT THIS PARTICULAR SITE, UM, WE'VE GOT SOME OTHER, ESPECIALLY IF IT'S GONNA BE A SUBDIVISION, UM, AND IT'S ONLY TWO LOTS.
I I DON'T SEE THE PURPOSE OF PUTTING IT JUST ON THAT, LOOKING AT THESE PICTURES OF THE LOCATION.
SO NO, I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF SIDEWALKS.
FOR THIS CASE, I AM NEUTRAL SIDEWALK.
SO I GUESS I WILL GO EITHER WAY.
I GUESS I WOULD DEFER TO WHEREVER THE BULK OF THE REST OF THE BOARD IS GONNA GO.
I COULD, I CAN BUY BOTH OUR, YOU I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN, I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE GONNA HAVE ENOUGH PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO HAVE A BULK WITHOUT SOMEBODY.
OH, YOU'RE GONNA NEED, SOMEBODY'S GONNA, THERE'S ONLY WE'RE SHORTER PERSONS TOO.
YOU JUST SAY, SO IF WE WERE TO LIKE ZOOM OUT AND LOOK AT THE STREET, MOST OF THE AUTHORITY IS RESIDENTIAL HOMES.
AND SO THE LIKELIHOOD OF THESE HOMES BEING SOMETHING HAPPENING TO THESE HOMES THAT WOULD ENABLE US, US IN OUR POWER TO ADD SIDEWALKS SEEMS PRETTY LOW.
AND THAT THIS IS GONNA REQUIRE THE TOWN OR SOME KIND OF MUNICIPAL STEP IN BECAUSE ALL OF THESE PARCELS WOULD HAVE TO RIGHT.
THEY'D HAVE TO DO SOMETHING ELSE.
IF THAT HELPS ANYONE'S DECISION MAKING.
WELL WHAT DO YOU THINK BILL? PERSUADE ME? I GOTTA GO WITH DAN.
I THINK IT IDES ALL RESIDENTIAL.
I THINK IT'S PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD.
AND ANNISE, YOU SAID THIS IS PART OF A, IT'S JUST OUTSIDE STUDY, JUST OUTSIDE THE OTHER SIDE OF THE THREW AWAY.
I MEAN I I THINK I'LL STOP THERE.
IT'S WORTH IT TO PUT A SIDEWALK.
I THINK WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO WRITE SOMETHING IN THAT TIMES THE SIDEWALKS, LIKE BEFORE AN OCCUPANCY PERMIT FOR A NEW BUILDING.
UM, BUT THAT IS, THERE'S ALREADY THREE FOR THE NONE.
AND THERE'S ONLY SIX OF US HERE TODAY.
I'M GUESS HOW WILL NONE, BECAUSE THERE'S SOME COMPLICATIONS HERE, BUT I THINK WE SHOULD, CAN I ASK A QUESTION ON TOO, IN TERMS OF SIDEWALKS, ARE THEY EVEN FEASIBLE? I I SEE A DRAINAGE BASIN HERE.
I I HOW FAR AWAY DID THE SIDEWALK BEACON THE STREET IS EVEN FEASIBLE I GUESS IS MY QUESTION ON THIS STREET, ON THE, ON THE, I MEAN FRONT OF DOOR OR TWO, ANOTHER ONE HOUSE EASEMENT.
DON'T THEY, THEY'RE NOT ACTUALLY ON THE PROPERTY.
CORRECT? THEY TYPICALLY GO IN THE RIGHT OF WAY.
THEY THEY'RE RIGHT WAY THE, YEAH, I'M SORRY.
SO WE DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT OF LINES.
RIGHT? SO WE DON'T KNOW WHERE THOSE ARE
SO THE RIGHT AWAY SHOULD BE MUCH WIDER THAN THE PAVEMENT.
IF IT'S JUST A PAVEMENT SECTION.
I MEAN, WHAT WE'VE GOT IN THE EXISTING HOUSE IS THEY'VE GOT ASPHALT WHICH GOES, THEY'VE GOT LIKE, LIKE THE TURNAROUND THERE.
AND SO WHAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO DO IS JUST EXTEND THAT A LITTLE BIT.
IT WOULDN'T BE THAT BIG OF A DEAL AS THE NEW HOUSE.
THEY WOULD HAVE TO PUT IN A NEW SIDEWALK THE WAY, ALL THE WAY ACROSS.
'CAUSE THERE'S ALREADY PAVEMENT ON THE EXISTING.
UM, BUT THAT'S, YOU'RE GOING WITH NO, THAT'S FOUR FOR NOW.
SO I'M NOT GONNA KEEP TRYING TO SELL PEOPLE 'CAUSE WE SHOULD MOVE ON.
[01:10:01]
SO HAMMER PLANNING BOARD HEREBY GRANTS PRELIMINARY PLA APPROVAL FOR THE WILLIAM NOLAN TWO LOT SUBDIVISION IN THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS AND WAIVERS.ONE INSTALLATION OF SIDEWALKS IS WAIVED.
FINALLY, THE HAMMER PLANNING BOARD WAIVES THE COMPLETION OF A FINAL PLAT AND THE HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD CHAIRMAN IS AUTHORIZED TO SIGN THE PRELIMINARY PLAT ONCE THE TOWN ENGINEER SIGNS OFF ON THE COLLAPSE.
ALRIGHT, NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS, UH, PLANNING BOARD TO ISSUE FINAL SCOPING DOCUMENT FOR THE PROPOSED MOD WASH LLC CAR WASH FACILITY.
BE LOCATED AT 5 3 6 3 SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD.
SO BASED ON STEEPER TIMEFRAME REQUIREMENTS, WE REALLY SHOULD TAKE ACTION ON THIS TODAY.
ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING THEY WANT CHANGED FROM THE MOST RECENT SCOPING DOCUMENTS? WE'RE GONNA, YOU ALSO LEFT YOUR PUBLIC HEARING OPEN.
YEAH, I CLOSED, I CLOSED IT BEFORE I, I DID THE SEEKER AND THEN BEFORE WE SIDEWALKS.
I KNOW IF WE LOST THE SIDEWALKS, IF WE'RE FORGET WITH THINGS, BUT, ALL RIGHT.
SO BACK TO THE OTHER QUESTION.
UM, ANY CHANGES IN THE MOST RECENT SCOPING DOCUMENTS? ALRIGHT, WE JUST WANT TO GET INTO THE RESOLUTION.
ANY CHANGES TO THE SCOPING DOCUMENT? UH, NOT THAT
SO MY ONLY CONCERNS WERE ONE, ARE THERE ANY STANDARD METHODOLOGIES OR ASTMS FOR NOISE OR FOR, UM, VISUAL RENDERINGS THAT WE SHOULD INCLUDE IN THE SCOPING DOCUMENT TO CLARIFY THE PROCEDURES THAT WE'RE USING FOR THE STUDIES? ALRIGHT, SO MAKE THE GO AHEAD INTO THE RESOLUTIONS THEN.
UM, I MEAN, DO WE KNOW, I MEAN THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING IS LIKE, DO WE NEED TO PUT THOSE IN THERE? I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE AN ANSWER TO THAT BECAUSE OF THE SECRET TIMEFRAME REQUIREMENTS.
I DON'T THINK WE CAN ANSWER THAT TODAY AT THIS MEETING IF WE DON'T KNOW IT OFF THE TOP OF OUR HEADS.
WELL THAT'S WHY I WAS LOOKING AT CAM THAT ASKING QUESTION.
DO YOU HAVE AN ANSWER? UM, I, I DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER FOR NOISE BECAUSE IT, UH, IT IS A ACOUSTICAL ENGINEER SPECIALIZE IN THAT.
SO I WOULD NOT BE COMFORTABLE MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS ON ANY KIND OF STANDARDS.
THERE ARE INDUSTRY STANDARDS IN THAT FIELD THAT, UH, SO ANY, I GUESS NOISE WORK SHOULD BE DONE BY SOMEONE WHO IS QUALIFIED IN THAT FIELD, I THINK WOULD IMPLIED THAT ANY, ANYTHING THAT WE WANTED ADDRESSED OR MITIGATED WOULD HAVE TO BE DEALT WITH BASED ON INDUSTRY STANDARDS FOR THAT ISSUE.
YEAH, I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO SPECIFICALLY SPELL THAT OUT IN A SCOPING DOCUMENT FOR VISUAL.
UM, FROM MY EXPERIENCE WITH DIS, IT'S TYPICALLY VISUAL IS A MORE PERSONAL, UH, UNDERTAKING.
IT'S WHAT THE BOARD WANTS TO SEE.
IF YOU WANNA SPECIFY RIGHT, WHAT, YOU KNOW, LOCATIONS YOU WANT TO SEE VISUALS FROM, THINGS LIKE THAT, UM, THEN THAT IS FOR YOU TO DETERMINE, RIGHT? THERE IS NO INDUSTRY STANDARD FOR VISUALS 'CAUSE IT'S PERSPECTIVE NOT, UH, LIKE SCIENTIFIC IN THE SENSE OF ENGINEERING.
IS VISUALIZATIONS THE CORRECT WORD? THAT WAS WHERE I GOT HUNG UP.
WELL, SO, SO, SO, SO WHAT I, WHAT I WANNA, I WANNA KIND OF WALK BACK WHAT I SAID A LITTLE BIT EARLIER AS FAR AS THE INDUSTRY STANDARDS.
WE'RE GONNA DO THE SCOPE, WHICH IS THE SUBJECTS THAT ARE GONNA BE ADDRESSED WHEN THEY'RE ADDRESSED.
WE DETERMINE WHEN WE GET THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT IF THAT MEETS WHAT WE WERE LOOKING FOR.
SO THEN THAT'S THE RIGHT TIME TO ADDRESS THOSE QUESTIONS.
WELL, NO, SO THE QUESTION THAT I RAISED AT THE LAST TIME WE TALKED ABOUT THIS WAS THAT IT'S UP TO US TO DICTATE TO THE BEST THAT WE THINK IS APPROPRIATE, THE STUDIES.
SO THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING IS VISUALIZATIONS THE RIGHT TERM OR IS IT LIKE VISUAL RENDERING? BUT VISUALIZATIONS AREN'T STUDIES, BUT WE'RE ASKING THEM TO PROVIDE, RIGHT? WE'RE ASKING VISUALIZATIONS.
IS THAT THE RIGHT THING? BECAUSE IF WE ASK FOR VISUALIZATION, IS THAT JUST THEM DRAWING A PICTURE OR IS THAT ACTUALLY MODELING IT FROM GET THAT'S WHAT I'M WONDERING.
WE GET THE IMPACT TO THE VIEW FROM THE ADJOINING LANDOWNER.
SO, SO WHEN THEY DO THAT, IF THEY, IF THEY DRAW LIKE A HANDWRITTEN PICTURE AND WE SAY THAT'S NOT GOOD ENOUGH WITH THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT, WE CAN SAY THAT AT THE DEIS, THIS ISN'T GOOD ENOUGH.
AND WE SEND THEM THE DEFICIENCY SAYING THIS IS NOT WHAT WE MEANT BY VISUALIZATIONS.
AND THEN THEY WOULD RESPOND WITH, HOPEFULLY WOULD GIVE THEM MORE DIRECTION AT THAT POINT IN TIME AS TO WHAT'S MISSING AND
[01:15:01]
WHY IT'S DEFICIENT.AND THEN THEY WOULD RESPOND TO THAT.
BUT JUST WANNA BE CLEAR THAT, 'CAUSE WE JUST WENT THROUGH THIS, THAT IF WE'RE NOT CLEAR IN WHAT OUR ASK IS, IT'S, THAT'S NOT WHY WE DIDN'T GET RESPONSIVE THAT LAST TIME.
WELL I KNOW, BUT I'M JUST SAYING CAN WE JUST BE, I'M JUST ASKING FOR CLARITY.
I RECORD IF YOU WANNA ADDRESS IT IF I MAY, MR. CHAIR? YES.
UH, MY NAME IS PETER BART FROM UD ASSOCIATES.
FIRST OF ALL, THE ONE FIRST THING I WANTED TO SAY IS YOU'RE, YOU'RE 100% CORRECT ABOUT, UM, IN, IN THE, WHEN THE DEIS IS SUBMITTED, IT IS THE CHARGE OF THIS BOARD TO DETERMINE IF IT'S COMPLETE.
AND THAT'S WHEN YOU WOULD DO THE ANALYSIS OF DO YOU HAVE THE INFORMATION IN THE FORMAT THAT YOU NEEDED TO BE IN, IN ORDER TO, TO BEGIN THE REVIEW PROCESS.
SO, UM, UM, THAT, THAT IS THE CHECKS AND BALANCES I WOULD SAY TO THAT.
WITH REGARDS TO THE VI VISUAL VISUALIZATIONS.
UM, MAYBE I, I, 'CAUSE I UNDER, I HEAR WHAT YOUR CONCERN IS.
IF, IF YOU WISH IT COULD BE VISUALIZATION, WE'RE GONNA DO PHOTO SIMULATIONS IS WHAT WE WILL DO.
UM, I MEAN I THOUGHT THE DOCUMENT WAS PRETTY CLEAR ON THAT, BUT IF YOU WANNA REMOVE ANY ENDING DUTY, THAT'S MORE OF WHAT I'VE BEEN USED TO HEARING IS PHOTO SIMULATIONS OR LIKE YEAH.
AND THAT'S, THAT'S HOW WE RENDERING IS NOT THIS, RIGHT? LIKE A RENDERING IS LIKE SOMEBODY'S JUST GONNA CORRECT.
AND, AND THE FACT IS I THOUGHT THE DOCUMENT WAS ACTUALLY PRETTY, PRETTY WELL PREPARED IN THAT, UH, I, UM, IT SAID VISUALIZATIONS TO BE PROVIDED TO A JOURNEY RESULT.
SO THAT'S WHERE I WAS, IT JUST WAS NOT THE TERM THAT I WAS USED TO SEEING.
BUT WE'RE INTERPRETING THAT AS PHOTO SIMULATIONS.
I'M TALKING ABOUT ON 4.5 0.2 IMPACT ON PUTTING RESOURCES WHERE IT SAYS THE LAST TWO BULLET.
SO YOU WANT ME TO CHANGE THAT FROM VISUALIZATION TO PHOTO SIMULATIONS? I MEAN THAT'S WHAT WE INTEND TO DO.
IT'S FOUR FOUR POINT SCROLL DOWN HERE.
PERFECT'S LOOKING AT THIS ON HIS PHONE.
WE JUST SAID LEAVING BECAME A LAPTOP BOARD.
AND THEN WE WOULD ALSO SAY, MY LAPTOPS ABSOLUTELY.
THE BATTERY DOESN'T LAST ENOUGH TO GET THROUGH THESE MEETINGS.
UH, I WAS SAYING ALSO THERE'S ANOTHER BULLET UNDERNEATH THAT SAYS PREPARATION OF POST DEVELOPMENT VISUALIZATION.
WE'RE JUST GONNA CHANGE THAT TO PHOTO SIMULATION AS WELL.
AND WHEREAS THE HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD REVIEWED THE APPLICATION AND REVISIONS TO THE APPLICATION, AND WHEREAS IN ACCORDANCE WITH PART 6 47 OF THE IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS PERTAINING TO ARTICLE EIGHT STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW ACT OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION LAW, THE HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD INITIATED A SEEKER COORDINATOR REVIEW PROCESS FOR THIS UNLISTED ACTION TO ESTABLISH THE PLANNING BOARD IS SECRET LEAD AGENCY.
AND WHEREAS THE HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD HAS RECEIVED INPUT FROM VARIOUS INVOLVED AND INTERESTED AGENCIES IN TOWN DEPARTMENTS AND HELD A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT AND SITE PLAN APPLICATION.
AND WHEREAS NO OBJECTIONS WERE MADE TO THE HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD ACTING AS SECRET LEAD AGENCY AND THE PLANNING BOARD THEREFORE HAS ESTABLISHED, HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED AS SECRET LEAD AGENCY.
AND WHEREAS IN ACCORDANCE WITH PAR 6 1 7 OF THE IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS PERTAINING TO ARTICLE EIGHT STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW ACT OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION LAW, AMBER PLANNING BOARD HAS COMPLETED PART TWO OF THE SEAF AND ANALYZED THOSE IMPACTS IDENTIFIED IN PART TWO AS POTENTIALLY MODERATE AND LARGE IMPACTS IN AN EXPANDED PART THREE DOCUMENT AND REVIEWED THE CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING SIGNIFICANCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 6 1 7 0.7 OF SEEKER AND DETERMINED WITH THE, THAT THE PROPOSED MOD WASH PROJECT MAY INCLUDE A POTENTIAL FOR AT LEAST ONE SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND THEREFORE ISSUED A POSITIVE DECLARATION ON JULY 19TH, 2023.
WHEREAS THE HAM PLANNING BOARD RECEIVED A DRAFT SCOPING DOCUMENT FROM THE APPLICANT ON OCTOBER 11TH, 2023.
AND WHEREAS THE HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD HELD A PUBLIC SCOPING MEETING ON NOVEMBER 15TH, 2023 RECEIVED INPUTS AND COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC IN TOWN ADVISORY BOARD.
UH, NOW THEREFORE BE RESOLVED THAT THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD HEREBY ISSUES THE ATTACHED FINAL SCOPING DOCUMENT AS AMENDED.
AND THOSE AMENDMENTS INCLUDE THE AMENDMENTS DISCUSSED AT TODAY'S MEETING.
WELL, SOMEONE WITH ROBERT'S RULES BETTER THAN ME.
[01:20:01]
AND NOT A SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM.SO YOU'D PROBABLY JUST WANNA PART TWO OR R TWO.
I THOUGHT WE WENT THROUGH THE FULL DOCUMENTS.
WE WENT THROUGH THE SHORT FORM THE ENTIRE, BUT NOT THE SHORT.
DID WE DO THE SHORT FORM OR THE LONG FORM? WE DID SHORT FORM FOR PARTIAL AND PART THREE.
SO I HAVE YOU, I GUESS, WITHDRAW THAT AMENDMENT.
WELL, I I DIDN'T ACTUALLY AMEND ANYTHING.
SO, UH, SO THAT'S A MOTION BY BILL SECOND BY SINCE ME SECOND BY CINDY.
SHOULD WE, UM, MAKE A NOTE OF THAT WE DID ON THE, THE LAST TIME ON THE AGENDA? AGENDA? YEAH.
JUST KEEP REMINDING ME, PLEASE.
UM, IT'S EASIER WHEN IT'S AT THE END, BUT OKAY.
NUMBER FIVE HAS ASKED TO BE TABLED TO JANUARY 3RD.
NUMBER SIX, STONEFIELD ENGINEERING REQUESTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL AND PRELIMINARY PLA APPROVAL OF PROPOSAL TO CONSTRUCT A 4,000 SQUARE FOOT RESTAURANT WITH A DRIVE THROUGH, LOCATED AT 3 5 6 0 MCKINLEY PARKWAY.
SO THIS IS WHERE FRIENDLY'S WAS.
GOOD EVENING, MEMBERS OF PLANNING BOARD.
REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT IS MR. ANDREW NEWMAN WITH MCKINLEY HOLDINGS.
UM, TONIGHT WE'RE SEEKING APPROVAL FOR THE PROPOSED RESTAURANT WITH DRIVE THROUGH AT UH, 3 5 6 0 MCKINLEY PARKWAY.
UM, PREVIOUSLY WE WERE HERE FOR A WORK SESSION, UH, BACK IN EARLY SEPTEMBER.
UH, SO I'LL GIVE A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE PROJECT, IF YOU CAN PULL IT UP ON THE SCREEN AND JUST HIGHLIGHT SOME CHANGES THAT WE MADE TO THE PLAN AND THEN WE CAN QUESTIONS IF, IF THAT'S AGREEABLE TO THE BOARD.
UM, SO THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WILL INCLUDE A NEW 3,999 SQUARE FOOT RESTAURANT WITH DRIVE-THRU, UH, LOCATED AS YOU MENTIONED, MR. CLARK AT THE, UH, FRIENDLY'S LOCATION THAT'S JUST EAST OF THE EXISTING HOME DEPOT.
UM, A FEW, FEW CHANGES FROM THE PREVIOUS PLAN IS WE DID REDUCE THAT BUILDING DOWN TO, UH, BELOW THAT 4,000 SQUARE FOOT THRESHOLD AS WELL AS MOVED IT A LITTLE CLOSER TO MCKINLEY TO ADD A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A PRESENCE, UM, UP ALONG THE ROAD THERE.
ZONING WISE, USE PERMITTED RIGHT BY RIGHT AND WE DO MEET THE, THE C TWO REQUIREMENTS.
UM, JUST ONE THING TO NOTE WITH THE, UM, IMPERVIOUS PERCENTAGE, UH, JUST WHERE THE LOT LINE IS, THE NORTHERN LOT, THE REMAINING LARGER LOT TO THE NORTH, THAT PERCENTAGE OF IN IMPERVIOUS IS GONNA INCREASE BY LESS THAN A PERCENT, A FAIRLY SMALL AMOUNT.
AND OUR SITE, UM, IS GONNA BE, UH, AT A 78.1%.
BUT AS A WHOLE, THE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT WE ARE IN INCRE DECREASING THE AMOUNT OF HARDSCAPE BY APPROXIMATELY 125 SQUARE FEET.
SO I KNOW IT'S KIND OF A FEW DIFFERENT NUMBERS THERE, BUT I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT AS A WHOLE WE'RE DECREASING PAVEMENT, HARD SKI I THINK BY UH, 25.
AND THEN THIS WAS THE ONE THAT YOU GUYS LAST SAW? YES.
UM, PARKING, THE SITE IS SELF PARKED WITH 23 PARKING SPACES.
UM, WE FEEL SUFFICIENT FOR THE PROPOSED BUILDING USE AND SIZE.
UM, AND THE BEAN THAT THERE'S A PARKING LOT IN THE NORTH OF US LIGHTING, THE SITE LIGHTING WILL BE, UH, PROVIDED BY FULLY DOWN LIT HIGH EFFICIENCY LED, DARK SKY COMPLIANT LIGHTS, UM, MINIMIZING SPILLOVER TO ANY OF THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN THE ORDINANCE.
STANDARDS, UH, LANDSCAPING, UH, WE FEEL THE LANDSCAPING PLAN IS GONNA KIND OF REFRESH THE AREA.
WE'RE PROPOSING NINE NEW EVERGREEN TREES, SOME FOUNDATION, FOUNDATION LANDSCAPING, AND THEN, UH, APPROXIMATELY 67 NEW SHRUBS KIND OF THROUGHOUT THE SITE.
UM, AND THEN STORMWATER, AS I TOUCHED ON, WE ARE DECREASING TOTAL IMPERVIOUS, SO WE WILL DE BE IN TURN DECREASING THE AMOUNT OF DISCHARGE FROM OUR SITE INTO THE EXISTING SYSTEM.
UH, WITH THAT, I'D LIKE TO POSE BY SAYING WE FEEL THAT THIS WILL BE A GREAT REDEVELOPMENT OF A CURRENTLY VACANT SITE.
UH, WE THINK IT'S HARMONIOUS WITH THE, UM, KIND OF KIND OF THE, THE CORRIDOR HERE.
AND, UM, WE'RE MORE THAN HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
ARE YOU STILL PROPOSING THE SUBDIVISION? I I BELIEVE THAT WOULD BE A SEPARATE APPLICATION RIGHT NOW.
[01:25:01]
WOULD BE.UM, BUT I DO THINK THAT AS A SEPARATE APPLICATION WE'VE TO FILE AND PRESENT TO THIS GROUP.
SO THAT'S SOMETHING TO CLARIFY.
UM, RECENTLY ANOTHER COMPANY REACHED OUT WITH A SUB DIVISION APPLICATION.
THERE, THERE ARE SURVEYORS DOING IT.
UM, THEY NEED A NEW YORK STATE LICENSE SURVEYOR MM-HMM
UM, WE WILL BE SUBMITTING THE, ONCE THEY GET, ONCE THEY HAVE THOSE PREPARED, THEY WILL BE SUBMITTING.
SO RIGHT NOW WE'RE JUST LOOKING AT
SO THIS IS, THEY'RE TAKING A VACANT BUILDING, DEMOLISHING IT, PUTTING A NEW BUILDING IN.
IT'S TAKING SOME OF IT OUT AND REPLACING IT WITH A PERMEABLE SURFACE.
THEY'VE GOT A DRIVE THROUGH IN AN AREA THAT IS A BIT MORE OPEN THAN THAT STARBUCKS DRIVE THROUGH THAT WE WERE DEALING WITH A FEW MONTHS AGO OR A YEAR AGO OR WHATEVER.
UM, ANY, ANY QUESTIONS OR ANYTHING ABOUT THIS PROJECT? DID WE GET A PARKING ANALYSIS ON THIS? AND THE REASON I ASK IS BECAUSE THAT PARKING LOT, UM, ADJACENT TO WHERE YOU ARE, UM, FROM LIKE CORE LIFE EATERY ALL THE WAY DOWN THROUGH, UM, IS IT TJ MAX? MM-HMM
I WAS JUST IN THERE THE OTHER DAY.
AND THEN ESPECIALLY ONCE THERE'S SNOW CARS ARE PARKING BASICALLY EVERYWHERE THEY CAN IN THAT LOT AND INCLUDING OF LIKE CUTTING ACROSS, THERE'S LIKE A HALF OF A SPOT ACROSS A COUPLE SPOTS, BUT WITH KYLE SNOW.
SO I JUST, IF WE DON'T ALREADY HAVE ONE IN THE FOLDER, IF YOU COULD SUBMIT A LETTER THAT GOES THROUGH WHAT YOUR CALCULATION WAS, ESTIMATING THE PARKING THAT YOU HAVE IN THIS SPACE AND WHY YOU CAME UP WITH THE NUMBER OF SPOTS YOU HAD, I THINK THAT'D BE REALLY HELPFUL BECAUSE PARKING IS JUST VERY TIGHT ADJACENT TO YOU.
AND ON THE ONE SIDE, I THINK THERE'S STILL OVER FULL PARKING ON THE OTHER SIDE, BUT WHO KNOWS WHAT OTHER USES MAY COME IN THERE.
SO JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT YOU GUYS HAVE OPTIMIZED YOUR PARKING RELATIVE TO THE USE.
YEAH, THAT'S KIND OF WHERE, HOW WE SETTLED ON THE 23 SPACES.
YOU KNOW, WE WANTED TO PROVIDE ENOUGH ON SITE BUT NOT, YOU KNOW, GO OVERBOARD WHERE WE'RE PAVING AREAS, WE DON'T NEED TO PAY IT.
SO IF WE COULD JUST PROVIDE A LETTER THAT WAS WHAT THE BASE WAS, BUT BASED ON SQUARE FEET USAGE AND HOW MANY EMPLOYEES ON SITE.
YOU JUST WRITE THAT UP FOR US IN A LETTER AND SEND IT IN.
I DON'T THINK WE HAVE THAT FROM YOU YET.
YEAH, I DON'T THINK WE SUBMITTED ONE, BUT WE'D BE HAPPY TO PROVIDE THAT.
AND YOU REDUCE IT FROM 4,000 FEET TO 39.99.
THAT WAS THE REASONING FOR THAT.
THIS IS, THIS IS THE ONE THAT UM, OR LIKE, LIKE OVER HERE AND THEN IT HAS THE LITTLE DIP DOWN GOES BEHIND YOU.
AND IT'S GOT LIKE A, LIKE THE LEVEL'S DIFFERENT.
YEAH, THERE'S, THERE'S, THERE'S FAIRLY SUBSTANTIAL GRADE CHANGE.
UM, YOU KNOW, WE'RE ABLE TO KIND MAKE UP FOR IT WITHIN THE GREEN SPACE, BUT THERE IS THAT LITTLE OKAY.
UH, JUST TO THE, FOR WHATEVER REASON I CAN'T MAKE THESE PLANS MAKE LOGISTICAL SENSE TO ME.
BUT I KNOW EXACTLY WHAT IT DROVE RIGHT PAST AND TOOK THAT TURN AROUND CORE LIFE DRIVE BETWEEN IT THE OTHER DAY JUST FOR THE YES.
THE ONLY OTHER, AND MAYBE THIS IS TRAFFIC, BUT BECAUSE THERE'S THE GRADE DIFFERENCE RIGHT NOW, THERE'S THAT, UM, THERE'S A WOODEN FENCE ON THE TOP OF THE, THE SLOPE.
I DON'T KNOW IF WE WANNA PUT SOME SORT OF, SOME SORT OF REFLECTIVE SIGNAGE ON THE TOP OF THAT.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S YOUR PROPERTY OR THE ADJACENT.
THAT WOULD BE THE ADJACENT PROPERTY.
'CAUSE THEY'RE HIGHER THAN US, SO I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN, YEAH, SO I MEAN THAT'S SOMETHING TRAFFIC SAFETY COULD REACH OUT TO AND WE COULD ASK PAUL, BUT THAT MAY BE A SPOT WE'RE JUST PUTTING SOME REFLECTIVE IN, ESPECIALLY IF YOU'RE MOVING A BUILDING AND THINGS OVER THERE JUST FOR SAFETY.
AND I CAN'T REMEMBER WHO OWNED THAT, IF IT'S BENDERSON, THE WHOLE THING OR WHAT, BUT THAT SHOULD BE AN EASY ADJUSTMENT IF WE WANTED TO ASK TRAFFIC SAFETY, BECAUSE THAT'S NOT YOUR POINT.
LIKE YOU STARTED ABOUT THE ON THE, I CAN'T SPEAK FOR THEM, BUT YEAH, THAT WOULD BE A LOWER JUMP.
SO WE GOTTA DO, WELL DO, WE DON'T, DO WE HAVE TO DO A COORDINATOR REVIEW IF THERE'S NO SECRET? NO SECRET.
SO YOU CAN SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING IF YOU DON'T HAVE ANY, IT MAKES OKAY.
WROTE IT, WRITTEN THIS DOWN AND CROSSED IT OFF A FEW TIMES HERE SINCE WE DON'T HAVE TO DO A COORDINATED REVIEW.
THEN I'M GONNA MAKE A MOTION TO SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING ON DECEMBER 20TH.
A MOTION BY BILL, SECOND BY DENNIS.
ALL IN FAVOR? WE DO BEFORE BILL, WE HAVE FIVE PROJECTS.
DO WANNA KEEP DOING THE 20TH? THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I HAVE FOR THE PIT PROJECT.
WE DO JOHNSON'S LANDING BECAUSE, BECAUSE WE, WE VOTED ON JOHNSON LANDING.
SO YOU CAN GET LOCATED BY BILL SECOND BY DENNIS.
AND YOU BRING PARKING LETTER? YEAH.
LEMME JUST, WHAT WAS THE DATE? I'M SORRY.
[01:30:01]
FINAL ITEM IN THE AGENDA IS FISHER RENTAL PROPERTIES, LLC REQUESTING PLANNING BOARD APPROVAL OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT AND SITE PLAN.APPROVAL OF PROPOSAL TO CONSTRUCT TWO 9,000 SQUARE FOOT WAREHOUSES AT 5 1 7 3 SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD.
BUT AS THE CHAIRMAN MENTIONED, WELL AGAIN, I'M WOOD WITH IAN WOOD DESIGN, AS CHAIRMAN MENTIONED, WE'RE PROPOSING TWO 9,000 SQUARE WAREHOUSE BUILDINGS ON THE EXISTING FISHER BUS SITE.
UM, THE SITE IS FOR THE MOST PART FULLY DEVELOPED.
THE LOCATION WHERE WE'RE PUTTING THE TWO WAREHOUSE BUILDINGS IS CURRENTLY A STONE GRAVEL, BROKEN UP LAPTOP, UH, PARKING LOT.
UM, THE NEW NEW BUILDINGS WILL OBVIOUSLY, OBVIOUSLY GO IN AND THEN WE'RE GONNA ALSO REPAVE THE AREAS ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH AND BETWEEN THE BUILDINGS AND THE ACCESS WILL REMAIN THAT EXISTING DRIVEWAY THAT, UH, FRONTS ON SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD.
UH, THE, THE LOT IS A FLAG LOT SO THAT THAT ACCESS DRIVE IS RELATIVELY LONG.
SO THE SITE IS SET, UM, QUITE A BIT BACK FROM SOUTHWESTERN BEHIND THOSE EXISTING MINI STORAGE BUILDINGS.
AND, UH, EXISTING UTILITIES WILL ALL TIE INTO THE EXISTING UTILITIES ON THE FISHER BUS SITE.
UM, STORMWATER MANAGEMENT WILL BE HANDLED BY THE EXISTING DETENTION BASIN THAT'S THERE.
UH, WE HAVE SUBMITTED ENGINEERED PLANS FOR C REVIEW.
WE ARE UNDER AN ACRE, SO WE DON'T HAVE TO ABIDE BY THE DEC REQUIREMENTS FOR STORMWATER.
AND IF ANYBODY HAS ANY QUESTIONS, WE CAN CERTAINLY ANSWER 'EM.
I KNOW ONE OF THE QUESTIONS I THINK THE CHAIRMAN ASKED ME BEFORE IS WHETHER HE IS GONNA RENT THESE MM-HMM.
WHETHER IT'S GONNA BE FOR FISHER.
UM, I FOUND OUT IN THE, SINCE I TALKED TO YOU, HE IS GONNA USE SOME OF 'EM AND THEN MOST LIKELY RENT THE OTHER UNITS.
AND IT'S NOT, AGAIN, IT'S NOT MINI STORAGE, IT'S CONTRACTOR SHOP WAREHOUSE, LIKE RE WHERE YOU RENT THE ENTIRE BAY.
WE HAVE A GARAGE DOOR AND A MAN DOOR AND POTENTIALLY A BATHROOM IN AN OFFICE.
THAT, SO THIS ONE WE DO HAVE TO DO A COORDINATOR REVIEW ON, RIGHT, JOSH? CORRECT.
UM, AND WE NEED 30 DAYS FOR THAT.
ANY, ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS PROJECT WHEN TRY AND WORK OUT DAYS HERE? MM-HMM.
DIDN'T DO MENTION SOMETHING THAT IF THEY, IT WAS JUST THEIR BUSES, THEY'D BE ALL RIGHT.
BUT IF THEY RENTED IT OUT, IT WAS ANOTHER PUBLIC MINI STORAGE.
IS IT PUBLIC? WE NEED THE, WE NEED THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT BECAUSE THEY ARE GONNA RENT THAT SO RIGHT.
AND THEY'RE ASKING FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT AND WE CAN ADDRESS IT AT THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT.
I'M JUST TRYING TO, IS THAT JANUARY 17TH SOUND GOOD? BECAUSE WE, BECAUSE WE'RE GONNA BE TWO DAYS SHORT OF THE COORDINATOR REVIEW ON THE THIRD.
THAT'LL BE THE FIRST MEETING AND SECOND MEETING IN JANUARY BECAUSE THE FIRST MEETING'S 28 DAYS, WE NEED 30 DAYS IT'LL MEET.
YOU GUYS WANNA GO THROUGH THE CRITERIA FOR SPECIAL USE PERMIT AND SEE IF YOU HAVE ANY SURE.
REQUESTS, UH, THAT WE CAN ADDRESS BEFORE THAT MEETING? THAT SOUNDS GOOD.
DO YOU HAVE THE CRITERIA WITH YOU? I HAPPEN TO HAVE IT WITH ME.
UH, SPECIAL PERMIT TECHNICALLY IS FOR PRIVATE RENTAL STORAGE AND THEY REFER TO MINI STORAGE UNITS IN HERE.
EVEN THOUGH THESE AREN'T TECHNICALLY MINI STORAGE UNITS, THAT STILL FALLS UNDER THE SAME SPECIAL USE PERMIT TYPE.
SO IT SAYS THE, UH, MINI STORAGE UNITS SHALL BE SET BACK A MINIMUM A HUNDRED FEET FROM THE RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT OR RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE.
OBVIOUSLY THERE'S NO RESIDENCE AS AROUND HERE.
B IS, UH, MINI STORAGE UNITS SHALL NOT BE VISIBLE FROM THE HIGHWAY AND THE FOLLOWING OPTIONS CAN BE UTILIZED.
UH, LANDSCAPE BERM, SOLID ARCHITECTURAL FENCE OR A WALL CAN BE ADDED IN THE FRONT YARD.
THESE SHALL BE A HEIGHT SUFFICIENT TO SCREEN THE UNITS.
I THINK, UH, WE HAD TALKED TO DREW PREVIOUSLY AND HE BELIEVES THAT THOSE EXISTING MINI STORAGE UNITS PROVIDE A, A BARRIER FROM SOUTHWESTERN.
OBVIOUSLY IT'S QUITE A WAYS BACK AND A LOT OF BUILDINGS IN BETWEEN.
ITEM TWO OR B TWO IS, UH, FULL SCALE BUILDINGS THAT INCLUDE OFFICES OR OTHER APPROVED USES ALONG WITH COMPONENTS LISTED IN SECTION B.
ONE CAN BE UTILIZED TO SCREEN UNITS, WHICH I THINK THAT KIND OF FALLS ON IN THE, THE, YOU KNOW, THE SLOT THAT WE KIND OF FALL INTO THAT.
AND PUBLIC MINI STORAGE UNITS THAT PROHIBITED ON LOTS FRONTING ROUTE FIVE, SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD CAMP
[01:35:01]
ROAD AND IN THE WATERFRONT OVERLAY DISTRICT.UM, IN THIS CASE IT SAYS THE PROHIBITED ON LOTS FRONTING.
AND AGAIN, WE CLARIFIED THAT WITHDREW AND HE'S NOT CONSIDERING THIS FRONTING 'CAUSE IT'S A LAG LOT WITH MOST OF THE FRONTAGE.
WE ALSO SHOWED IT TO JEFF, ACCORDING ENFORCEMENT OFFICER CONCURRED WITH DEPOSITION.
WHAT'S THE DEFINITION OF PUBLIC MINI STORAGE? DO WE HAVE A SQUARE FOOTAGE? THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I QUESTION.
WITHDREW INITIALLY, BUT HE SAID IT RIGHT.
THEY, IF IF WE, IF YOU SAID, IF IF WE HAD A, A SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR THE MINI STORAGE AND THE UNITS YOU WERE RENTING OUT WERE BIGGER THAN THAT, THEN WE'D AVOID IT.
THAT'S WHY I WAS ASKING THE QUESTION.
I KNOW THE CODE HAS A DEFINITION OF PUBLIC MINI STORAGE, BUT THERE'S NO, NO SQUARE REQUIREMENTS BASICALLY.
BUT YOU, IT SEEM TO BE THE REQUIREMENTS ANYWAY.
UNLESS I BELIEVE, I BELIEVE BECAUSE THEY'RE ACCESSIBLE FROM THE OUTSIDE AS OPPOSED TO FROM AN INTERNAL CORRIDOR.
SO YOU ARE AUTHORIZING US TO COMPLETE THE COORDINATOR REVIEW.
IT WAS TO MAKE A MOTION TO AUTHORIZE A COORDINATED REVIEW FOR FISHER WAREHOUSES AND TO SCHEDULE PUBLIC HEARING ON JANUARY 17TH.
SECOND, THERE'S A MOTION BY BILL SECOND BY CINDY.
UM, I WAS GOING TO AMEND THE MINUTES.
THERE'S A NOTE IN THE MINUTES ABOUT THE RECORDING.
UM, SINCE THE RECORDINGS AREN'T REQUIRED, I DON'T THINK THE MINUTES NEED TO HAVE A NOTE IN THERE THAT THE RECORDING HAD SOME ISSUES AND IT WASN'T ON FACEBOOK BECAUSE NEITHER OF THOSE ARE REQUIRED BY LAW.
I WAS JUST GONNA AMEND THE MINUTES.
TAKE OUT THAT NOTE IN REVIEWING THEM.
THE, THE MINUTES FOR THE TIMES WHERE WE DIDN'T HAVE THE RECORDING ARE VERY DETAILED.
JUST THE DETAILED AS THE MINUTES FOR THE TIMES WHERE WE DO HAVE THE COURT WITH THE RECORDINGS.
SO WHAT'S YOUR COMMENT? WE HAD TWO ITEMS ON THE WORK SESSION ON THE NOVEMBER 15TH MEETING AND THE WORK SESSION IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE MINUTES.
SO I THINK THAT IF WE'RE, UH, I DON'T KNOW.
I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW IF WE NEED TO TAKE ACTION AN HOUR IF WE NEED TO GO HELP BACK, FILL THAT IN WITH, UH, WITH SARAH.
BUT WE HAD TWO ITEMS FOR WORK SESSION THAT WE DID DISCUSS THAT ARE NOT REFERENCED.
SO EITHER WE NEED, IF WE'RE NOT REQUIRED FOR THE WORK SESSION TO HAVE MINUTES, WE WOULD NEED TO NOTE THAT SOMEHOW, AND MAYBE THIS IS SOMETHING YOU WANNA PAUSE ON TO OUR NEXT MEETING, JEN, SO YOU HAVE TIME TO THINK ABOUT IT.
JOSH HAS NOTES HE CAN INCORPORATE INTO FOR, FOR THE WORK SESSION.
AND I THINK WE CAN APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING.
SEPARATELY FROM THE WORK SESSION.
UM, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE REFLECTING THAT BECAUSE AT SOME POINT WE DO TYPICALLY DO IT.
PROBABLY MAKE SURE WE, UH, SO THAT JUST ME SENDING THOSE NOTES TO CENTER OR HOW DID THAT WORK? JUST I THINK WE'LL HAVE TO FIGURE THAT OUT.
I'M TRYING TO JUST, SO CAN WE ADD A NOTE TO THE FRONT THAT JUST SAYS MINUTES FROM THE WORK SESSION TO FOLLOW OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT? OR WE'LL BE, YEAH, WE CAN DO THAT.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ACKNOWLEDGING BECAUSE IT'S DIFFERENT FROM OUR STANDARD PRACTICE SOMEHOW IN THESE MINUTES, BUT THAT, THAT DIFFERENCE IS THERE.
I DUNNO THE, FOR THAT MEETING ANYWAY.
WHAT'S THAT? WOULD IT BE EASIER JUST TO TABLE THE MINUTES? COULD DO EITHER OR.
UM, I MEAN USUALLY WE HAVE THEM TOGETHER SO THAT I THINK WELL HOLD ON.
LEMME WANNA DOUBLE CHECK THAT WE WENT THROUGH, BECAUSE DID YOU WANNA SAY, I THINK, UM, WE HAVE TWO WORK SESSION ITEMS ON THE 15TH ODOR STOP.
AND THEN JOSEPH, I HAVE FOLLOW UP.
IT'S THE ISSUES ON THE REGULAR MEETING.
MOD WASH AND DAYTO WHERE PEOPLE, RESIDENTS NEARBY HAVE, UH, MAYBE WANTING TO LOOK AT THOSE MINUTES TO DECIDE WHAT THEY WANT TO DO.
THAT MAKES ME WANT TO GET THOSE MINUTES ON THE WEBSITE.
UM, IF WE DON'T GET THE DATA ONES ON THERE, THE RESIDENTS ARE GONNA START ASKING FOR THE MINUTES TOMORROW MORNING.
SO, UH, WELL, IT IS ON FACEBOOK THAT PART OF THE MEETING.
IT IS, IT IS ACCESSIBLE ON FACEBOOK.
IT IS NOT ACCESSIBLE ON FACEBOOK.
BUT I THINK BECAUSE I, I KNOW THAT THEY, THEY WANNA GET THEIR INFORMATION AND THEY WANNA
[01:40:01]
GET WHAT THEY WANT QUICKLY.UM, THEY'VE, THEY FOILED SOME THINGS THAT WE HADN'T EVEN DONE YET AT ONE POINT.
SO I THINK IN THIS CASE WE SHOULD JUST SEPARATE IT SO WE CAN GET THOSE APPROVED AND BEGIN POSTED AND GET THEM TO THE PEOPLE THAT WANT 'EM.
WE CAN ALWAYS APPROVE THEM AND THEN SUBSTITUTE THEM LATER WITH A FULL COPY.
AS LONG AS WE'RE GONNA ADDRESS AT SOME POINT THAT YEAH.
THE WORK SESSION AND GET THOSE.
SO, SO WE WILL, WE'LL, WE'LL DO IT NOW.
WE'LL PROVE THE MINUTES OF JUST THE REGULAR MEETING.
AND THEN WITH THE CHANGE THAT YOU PROPOSED WITH THE CHANGE.
AND THEN NEXT WEEK WE'LL AMEND THOSE MINUTES TO INCLUDE THE WORK SESSION AND WE WILL MAKE A NOTE THAT WE'RE NOT AMENDING THE PART THAT WE ALREADY PROVED TODAY.
SO I'M, MAKE A MOTION TO AMEND THE, OR TO, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FOR THE 16TH.
FOR APPROVE THE MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 15TH AS AMENDED.
SO DREW IS COMING ON THE 20TH AND HE'S BRINGING SNACKS, COOKIES, INVITING ANYONE ELSE TO DO SO.
WE HAVE TO WATCH THE, UH, MANDATORY AND SEXUAL HARASSMENT TRAINING BY THE END OF THE YEAR, CORRECT? OH, I ALREADY DID MINE.
DID WE GET A LINK FOR THIS? DID YOU GET A LINK? I CONTACTED THE CLERK'S OFFICE.
OH, WE CAN PROBABLY ADJOURN BEFORE WE DO THIS.
SO THERE'S A MOTION BY DAN, SECOND BY MARGOT TO ADJOURN.
I I THOUGHT THAT WOULD, I THOUGHT, THOUGHT WE WOULD WATCH THAT AND EAT CHRISTMAS COOKIES.