[00:02:11]
I KNOW THAT MEGAN OR MARGO WAS NOT COMING.
I DON'T KNOW WHERE CAITLIN IS.
SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I THOUGHT WAS, WAS IMPORTANT TO GO OVER, UM, A COUPLE OF ITEMS AND, UH, IT PERTAINS TO THE AGENDA AND CLARIFICATION ABOUT WHAT GOES IN THE WORK SESSION, WHAT CAN BE ADDED TO A MEETING, WHAT CAN'T BE ADDED TO A MEETING, WHAT, UM, WE HAVE TO, WHATEVER WE DO IN A MEETING HAS TO BE POSTED WITH THE EXCEPTION OF IF THE, UM, PLANNING BOARD OR PLANNING DEPARTMENT OR THE CONSULTANT WANTS TO MAKE COMMENTS IN REGARDS TO A CASE THAT DOES NOT HAVE TO BE ADVERTISED, BUT WHATEVER WE DO AT THIS BOARD HAS TO BE ADVERTISED.
SO I CAN'T JUST ADD SOMETHING.
WE GOT AN EMAIL ABOUT, UM, SOME UPDATES ON SOME, UM, OTHER BOARDS.
AND THE ONLY THING WE, I DID SOME RESEARCH AND THE ONLY THING THAT CAN BE UPDATED IS IN THE EVENT THAT THERE IS SOMETHING ABOUT THAT A BOARD, ANOTHER BOARD, LET'S SAY THE BOA, IT CAN BE UPDATED BASED ON THE CASE THAT'S IN FRONT OF US.
WE CAN'T JUST DO UPDATES OR HOLD A MEETING, HOLD AN UPDATE SESSION ON ALL THE OTHER BOARDS.
UM, I AM JUST GONNA PREFACE THIS WITH, UM, AND THIS IS NOT A COMPLAINT.
I'M JUST GONNA TELL YOU WHAT THE PROCESS WAS FOR ME AS THE CHAIR.
SO WHEN I, WHEN I WAS APPOINTED IN JANUARY, IT'S NOT LIKE A TEAM OF TRAINERS COME AND SAY, ALL RIGHT, NOW YOU'RE THE CHAIR AND WE'RE GONNA SHOW YOU WHAT TO DO.
OH, AND BY THE WAY, UM, WE'RE GONNA, YOU HAVE TO BE ON A, THE BOA, THE BOA COMMITTEE AND THE LWRP BOA, WHAT DOES BOA MEAN? BROWN, BROWN BOARD OF BOARD OF ELECTION.
SO, UM, BUT I WAS PUT ON THE BOA OR THE BROWNFIELD, AND THEN I WAS TAKEN OFF BECAUSE IT WAS A RESTRUCTURING.
AND SO THE PLANNING BOARD WAS REMOVED FROM THE VI UNDERSTAND NOW THAT THERE'S SOMETHING ELSE GOING ON, AND I'M, AND AS THE MEMBER OF THE PLANNING BOARD, I'M GONNA BE ADDED BACK ONTO THAT SHORTLY.
THERE'S SOME SORT OF RESTRUCTURING THE LWRP UM, BILL, ARE YOU, YOU STILL GO TO THE LWRP AS A MEMBER OF THE PLANNING BOARD? OR YOU I WAS NEVER ON IT AS THE MEMBER OF THE PLANNING BOARD.
I WAS ON IT, IT APPOINTED INDEPENDENTLY BY THE TOWN BOARD.
[00:05:01]
WHAT DO YOU, WHAT IS YOUR POSITION, IF YOU DON'T MIND, DO YOU REPORT BACK TO THE TOWN BOARD OR, I AM ON IT THE SAME AS EVERY OTHER MEMBER OF THAT BOARD.SO IS THE MEMBER FROM THE PLANNING BOARD SUPPOSED TO BE ON THERE AS WELL? UM, I DON'T KNOW IF, SO WE GET A GRANT TO DO THE FUNDING AND SOMETIMES THAT WILL SAY IF YOU NEED A MEMBER OF THE PLANNING BOARD OR NOT.
THERE'S A LOT OF BOARDS WHERE WE DON'T HAVE MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING BOARDS.
SO I, I DON'T KNOW OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD IF WE HAVE TO HAVE A MEMBER OF THE PLANNING BOARD ON THAT OR NOT.
SO I DON'T THINK IT'S EVER BEEN SPECIFIED HAS IT? RIGHT.
SO IF IT'S NOT SPECIFIED, IT HAVE TO, IT'S NOT SPECIFIED.
BUT AS WE'RE ON THE PLANNING BOARD FOR THE, SO I THOUGHT THE ONLY ONE THAT AT THE PLANNING BOARD CHAIR, THAT WAS THE ONLY OTHER APPOINTMENT WAS ON THE CODE REVIEW COMMITTEE IN THAT ROLE.
AND THAT ALL OF THE OTHER ROLES, IF SOMEBODY SERVES ON THE COMMUNITY OR BOARDS, I SIT ON THE REFUGE REFUSE AND RECYCLING COMMITTEE, THAT IS ME AS MY SECOND APPOINTMENT TO THAT COMMITTEE.
AND IT HAS, IS SEPARATE, NOTHING TO DO WITH THE PLANNING BOARD.
SO THE REASON I'M SHARING ALL OF THIS IS BECAUSE IT TOOK ME FIVE MONTHS TO FIGURE THAT ALL OUT.
AND YES, I AM ON CODE REVIEW AND I'VE BEEN ATTENDING MOST OF THOSE MEETINGS.
I JUST FINISHED, WE JUST FINISHED A TWO AND A HALF HOUR CODE REVIEW.
AND, UM, BUT HAVING SAID THAT, I CAN GO BACK TO THE AGENDA.
SO ANYTHING TO BE ADDED TO THE AGENDA, UM, NEEDS TO GET APPROVED AND IT HAS TO BE POSTED FOR THAT NEXT MEETING.
SO IF THERE'S SOMETHING WE'RE GONNA DO, IT'S GOTTA BE POSTED ON THE AGENDA.
UM, HAVING SAID THAT, THE WORK SESSION, SO I'M GONNA HAVE JOSH, UM, EXPLAIN WHAT GOES WHERE AND HOW.
SO, UH, HOW WE DO THINGS IN PLANNING DEPARTMENT IS ANYTHING THAT IS SUBMITTED TO US THAT MEETS THE DEADLINE, UM, WE PUT ON A WORK SESSION, LIKE AN ITEM THAT YOU GUYS HAVEN'T SEEN BEFORE.
THEY'VE SUBMITTED THEIR FEES, SUBMIT THEIR SITE, PLAN, THEIR APPLICATION.
WE PUT IT ON THE WORK SESSION BECAUSE IT'S A NEW ITEM.
UM, IF THERE'S BEEN A PROJECT THAT YOU GUYS HAVE SEEN BEFORE, IT WAS TWO MONTHS AGO, IT WAS SIX MONTHS AGO, SEEN IT BEFORE.
IF THEY'VE COME TO A WORK SESSION BEFORE AND THEY HAVEN'T SEEN 'EM FOR A WHILE AND THEY RESUBMIT SOMETHING, WE PUT THEM ON A REGULAR MEETING.
AND THEN ANYTHING THAT'S BEEN TABLED THAT'S BEEN SEEN, THAT'S BEEN TABLED TO A FOLLOWING MEETING, WE ALSO PLACE THAT ON A REGULAR MEETING.
UM, WE ALSO SOMETIMES DO LIKE OTHER BUSINESS, SO WE DON'T NOTICE SPECIFIC THINGS.
SO THERE'S AN UPDATE THAT THE CHAIR WANTS TO GIVE.
IF THERE'S AN UPDATE THAT SARAH OR AN ELISE OR I WANT TO GIVE TO YOU GUYS, UM, THEN WE PUT THAT IN OTHER BUSINESS AND WE DON'T NOTICE IT BECAUSE IT'S NOT IN THE ITEM THAT YOU'RE ACTING ON, OR THAT'S KIND OF HOW WE'VE BEEN DOING THINGS FOR, UH, I'VE BEEN HERE THREE YEARS AND LONGER.
THAT'S KIND OF HOW WE'VE BEEN LITTLE BIT ON DOING.
SO, SARAH, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD TO THAT PROCESS? NO.
UM, SO THAT'S JUST FOR CLARIFICATION PURPOSES.
SO THERE, THE STUFF THAT'S IN THE WORK SESSION WILL BE NEW ITEMS THAT WE'VE NEVER VOTED ON.
IT DOESN'T REQUIRE A VOTE AND IT, AND NOTHING THAT WE'VE SEEN BEFORE SHOULD BE IN THE WORK SESSION UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES.
UM, THE REGULAR MEETING, THERE IS NO CAP ON THE AGENDA.
UM, AND SO WHATEVER COMES BEFORE US WILL COME BEFORE US.
UM, I REVIEW THE AGENDA BEFORE THEY SEND IT TO PRINT, AND IF WE THINK THAT IT'S GONNA BE TOO HEAVY OR WE LOOK AT THE TIME, THE THREE OF US, WE DISCUSS THAT PROBABLY PRETTY MUCH, I MEAN, WE HAVEN'T REALLY HAD ANYTHING THAT WE'VE PULLED RIGHT.
AND, AND TABLE, UM, WE PROBABLY DO THAT BEFORE IT EVEN MAKES IT TO THE AGENDA.
WE TRY TO KEEP RESPECTIVE TIMELINES FOR THAT.
UM, THE ONLY OTHER THING THAT I WANNA BRING UP, UM, IT'S GONNA BE A SHORT, BUT IF ANYBODY HAS ANY QUESTIONS I WANNA GET DOWN, YOU'RE MORE THAN HAPPY IS THE SIDEWALK ORDINANCE.
UM, IN THE RESOLUTION, IT IS GOING TO SAY, UM, IF A SIDEWALK IS NOT, UM, REQUIRED OR WARRANTED, IT'S GOING TO SAY SIDEWALKS ARE NOT WARRANTED.
AND IF THE SIDEWALKS ARE REQUIRED, IT'S GONNA SAY SIDEWALKS WERE WARRANTED BASED ON THE ORDINANCE.
WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THE, UM, SITE PLAN REVIEW ORDINANCES.
WE'VE TIGHTENED UP THE LANGUAGE, WE'VE CORRECTED THE TIMEFRAME.
NOW WHEN THERE'S A SITE PLAN COME BACK FOR, IT'S GONNA COME BACK FOR REVIEW FOR US, IT WILL BE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC FOR FIVE DAYS AND, AND INSTEAD OF 10.
UM, WE'RE IN THE PROCESS OF DOING THAT.
AND OTHER THAN THAT, THAT'S WHAT I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY, BUT I HAD TO PUT IT ON THE AGENDA AND MAKE A BIG DEAL.
AND I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT TO MAKE YOU HERE AT SIX 30.
IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS OR CONCERNS OR ANYTHING? BILL, DAN, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING? UM, JUST I GUESS CLARIFICATION ON THE AGENDA FOR MY PART, LIKE LOOKING AT TODAY'S
[00:10:01]
AGENDA, TWO THINGS.WELL, ONE WAS TABLED, ONE WAS WITHDRAWN.
IS THERE, WHAT'S THE PROCESS FOR, IS THERE A WAY TO CLEAN UP THE PROCESS SO THAT WE DON'T PUT THINGS ON THE AGENDA UNLESS WE KNOW THEY'RE GOING TO BE, THEY'RE GONNA HAVE THEIR DOCUMENTATION READY? THEY'RE, WELL, THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, IF WE WERE, LIKE IN ESES CASE, WE REQUESTED THE DOCUMENT NOT TO THE MONITOR UNTIL WE GET THAT DOCUMENT.
THE ISSUE IS WE HAVE OUR PLAN BOARD MEETINGS ON WEDNESDAYS, AND BECAUSE OF THE BUFFALO NEWS DEADLINE, WE USUALLY HAVE TO GET IT OUT AT THE LATEST, LIKE FRIDAY MORNING.
AND EVEN SOMETIMES WHEN WE GET IT OUT FRIDAY MORNING, THEY HAVE ISSUES AND THEY HAVE GLITCHES.
SO WE GET IT OUT THURSDAY AFTER OUR MEETING.
SO USUALLY AT A MEETING YOU GUYS SAY, AND WE'VE TABLED IT FOR THIS INFORMATION, UM, WE'LL SEE YOU AT THIS MEETING, AND THEN WE ADD IT TO THE AGENDA BECAUSE YOU GUYS HAVE TABLED IT TO SEND DATES.
SO THE ONLY THING I CAN THINK OF THAT WILL CLEAN THAT UP IS IF THERE'S, YOU KNOW, YOU ASKED FOR A LOT OF THINGS AND YOU WERE FEEL LIKE THE APPLICANT MAY NOT BE READY TO COME BACK AT THE NEXT MEETING, THAT DON'T SAY, WE'LL TABLE THEM TO, YOU KNOW, TWO WEEKS FROM NOW, WE JUST SAY, WE'LL TABLE YOU UNTIL YOU'RE READY.
AND THEN WHEN THEY SUBMIT, WE'LL ADD THEM WHEN THEY SUBMIT.
THAT'S THE ONLY THING I CAN THINK OF THAT WILL CLEAN UP THAT PROCESS BECAUSE WE HAVE TO MEET OUR DEADLINES TO GET THE AGENDA OUT.
I THINK MEAN THAT MAKES SENSE.
WE'LL GET YOU ON THE NEXT AGENDA.
IT COULD BE A CASE BY CASE BASIS.
IF, YOU KNOW, YOU ASK FOR A PARKING STUDY THAT TAKES, YOU KNOW, TWO DAYS, THEN WE CAN ADD 'EM TO THE NEXT.
BUT IF YOU ASK FOR A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT THINGS, YOU THINK IT WILL TAKE LONGER THAN TWO WEEKS.
YOU CAN SAY AS A CHAIR YOU CAN SAY, YOU KNOW, WE WON'T TABLE YOU UNTIL TWO WEEKS.
WE'LL TABLE YOU WHEN YOU'RE READY, SUBMIT TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, AND THEN WE'LL ADD INTO THE AGENDA AS NEEDED.
WELL, A LOT OF TIMES YOU'LL SAY, WILL YOU BE READY FOR THE NEXT MEETING? AND OF COURSE THEY ALWAYS SAY, WELL, THAT'S, YEAH, EXACTLY.
SO MAYBE THAT'S THE, NOT THE QUESTION TO ASK.
SO MAYBE INSTEAD OF ASKING THE QUESTION, WILL YOU BE READY? THE THE STATEMENT SHOULD BE, UM, WE'RE NOT GONNA TABLE YOU AT THIS TIME, HOWEVER, PLEASE NOTIFY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT WHEN YOU HAVE ALL OF THE PAPERWORK IN ORDER AND WE WILL PUT YOU ON THE AGENDA.
AND THEN, AND BECAUSE WE'VE NOTICED ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THERE ARE A LOT OF CASES THAT HAVE BEEN POSTPONED, AND SO WE HAVE THIS LENGTHY AGENDA, AND THEN BY THE TIME WE GET TOGETHER, THERE'S, THERE'S HARDLY ANYTHING.
RIGHT? SO, AND MAYBE OTHER CASES COULD HAVE COME INSTEAD, BUT BECAUSE OF THE POSTING AND THE DELAY AND EVERYTHING, IT WOULD JUST BE A BETTER HANDLING.
THAT MIGHT BE A, MAYBE WE SHOULD TRY THAT.
I THINK THAT WOULD CREATE EFFICIENCY, HONESTLY.
SO I THINK WE'RE TABLING AND WHAT YOU'RE GONNA FIND AS THE PUSHBACK IS, IS THAT PEOPLE ARE GONNA FEEL LIKE WE'RE DELAYING THEM.
AND THAT IF THEY ARE COMMITTING AND YOU, THIS IS THE BACK AND FORTH, AND THERE ARE PROS AND CONS TO THE WAY THAT BILL AND WHILE HE WAS CHAIR AND PUT IN A, A LIMIT ON THE NUMBER OF ITEMS ON THE AGENDA.
AND THE, ONE OF THE UPSIDES TO THAT, AND I WAS SKEPTICAL, UH, WAS THAT IT FORCED PEOPLE BECAUSE THEY KNEW THERE WERE LIMITS THAT THEY HAD TO BE READY OR THEY'D LOSE THEIR SPOT.
AND SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I THINK THAT THE, THE UPSIDES OF THAT WERE, IS THAT PEOPLE KNEW THAT THEY WERE MAYBE GONNA BE A COUPLE MEETINGS OUT AND THEN THEY DIDN'T, IT WAS EXTREMELY RARE TO HAVE SOMEBODY BACK OUT BECAUSE THEY WANTED THEIR MEETINGS SLOT AND THEY GOT THEIR STUFF TOGETHER.
WELL, THE ONLY PROBLEM THAT I HAVE WITH THAT IS I'VE BEEN ASKED BY COUNCIL AND THE TOWN BOARD NOT TO CAP THE AGENDA.
WELL, YOU KNOW, IF, IF I MIGHT, WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE, AND I THINK THAT'S DAN'S ALLUDING TO, IF THEY HAVE TO HAVE INFORMATION TO US, IT DOESN'T GO IN THE PAPER IF WE DON'T HAVE IT.
IN OTHER WORDS, IF, IF THEY NEED TO COME BACK WITH, WITH A LETTER OF INTENT, UH, WHEN YOU GET THE LETTER OF INTENT, THAT'S WHEN YOU SAY, OKAY, NOW WE CAN DO SOMETHING WITH IT.
AND IT MIGHT BE THEY MIGHT HAVE TO MISS A MEETING BECAUSE I THINK THE ONLY SHOULD BE ON THE DEVELOPERS TO GET THEIR INFORMATION INTO US, RATHER THAN US KEEP, YOU KNOW, RESCHEDULING AND, AND, AND TABLING THAT EFFECTIVELY WOULD MAKE IT IMPOSSIBLE FOR SOMEONE TO GET ON THE NEXT MEETING.
AND I THINK THAT THAT WOULD BE FRUSTRATING TO PEOPLE TO, DEPENDING ON WHAT THEY HAVE TO PROVIDE, ESPECIALLY IF IT'S DOABLE.
I MEAN, SO THE MY RECOMMENDATION, BECAUSE I THINK YOU NEED A LOT OF PUSHBACK AND COMPLAINTS, AND THEY GET THE SAME RECOMMENDATION IS, IS IF SOMEBODY, IF WE THINK IT'S REASONABLE AND SOMEBODY ASKS TO BE ON THE NEXT AGENDA, AND WE THINK IT'S REASONABLE FOR THEM TO PROVIDE MINOR INPUTS OR CHANGES OR EVEN SOMETHING SLIGHTLY MORE SUBSTANTIAL, DOABLE, I THINK WE NEED TO TAKE THEM AT THEIR WORD.
OTHERWISE WE'RE GONNA COME BACK TO THE SAME COMPLAINT WHERE PEOPLE FEEL LIKE WE'RE UNDULY DELAYING THEM AND NOT LETTING
WELL, I'M JUST SAYING THAT IF WE START TELLING PEOPLE THAT THEY CAN ONLY COME ONCE A MONTH INSTEAD OF EVERY TWO WEEKS, THAT'S GONNA CHANGE THINGS.
WELL, WE'RE NOT SAYING ONCE A MONTH.
WHAT, WHAT DENNIS IS SAYING IS, IS THAT IF, IF THEY DON'T HAVE THE PAY AND THEY HAVE TO HAVE THE STUFF THE MORNING AFTER A MEETING, THERE'S NO SCENARIO WHERE SOMEBODY CAN MEET THAT REQUIREMENT AND BE ON A MEETING IN TWO WEEKS.
WELL, SHE MIGHT, WHEN WHEN THEY COME TO
[00:15:01]
OUR MEETINGS, THEY SHOULD HAVE WHAT YOU NEED.IF, IF WE NEED SOMETHING FROM THEM, UH, YOU KNOW, OH YEAH, WE'LL HAVE THE NEXT MEETING AND THEN, OH, WELL WE DON'T HAVE IT.
AND, AND IF, IF YOU SAY, OKAY, ONCE YOU GET ALL THAT, THEN WE WILL PUT YOU ON THE AGENDA.
IT IT, IT'LL STOP THEM FROM TELLING US, YEAH, WE'LL HAVE IT.
UH, AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE SPOTTED AGENDA.
SO, BUT IT WON'T ALLOW PEOPLE TO HAVE CONSECUTIVE MEETINGS.
SO MY PUSHBACK ON THAT IS, SO FOR EXAMPLE, IF SOMEBODY COMES WEDNESDAY AND WHERE YOU GUYS ARE LIKE, HEY, WE NEED, YOU KNOW, X, Y, AND Z, WE NEED, YOU KNOW, THESE TWO THINGS, THESE THREE THINGS, IF WE DON'T HAVE IT, YOUR SUGGESTION IS MAYBE DON'T HAVE IT.
AND WE DON'T PUT THE ON THE AGENDA, BUT WE PUT THE AGENDA OUT THAT THURSDAY, WHICH IS LITERALLY THE NEXT DAY.
SO THERE'S NO, BUT THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING.
THEY ASK FOR SOMETHING WEDNESDAY NIGHT, THERE'S NO WAY THAT THEY'LL HAVE GET TIME TO PREPARE STUFF BY THURSDAY TO BE IN THE NEXT MEETING.
SO, WELL, I UP HANG ON ONE SECOND.
RIGHT? IT IS, IT'S, HERE'S A, A SUGGESTION AND SEE IF YOU GUYS, MAYBE THIS WOULD SOLVE BOTH PROBLEMS. IF, IF THEY SAY, YES, WE'RE GONNA BE THERE IN THREE WEEKS, OR WE'RE GONNA BE THERE IN TWO WEEKS, AND WE PUT IT ON THE AGENDA, OBVIOUSLY BECAUSE OF THE TIME FRAME THAT WE HAVE, THE CHALLENGE THAT WE HAVE WITH THE AGENDA, AND WE PUT THEM ON THAT MEETING AND THEY SAY, AND THEN THEY SAY, NO, I WANT A TABLE.
BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE PAPERWORK.
WE DON'T TABLE IT FOR THE NEXT MEETING UNTIL THEY PRODUCE THE PAPERWORK.
THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET AT.
NOT THAT WE DON'T, SO YOU'RE GIVING THEM THE FIRST CHANCE THAT THEY DON'T GET A SECOND.
BUT I, WELL, AND I DON'T THINK A LOT OF THEM DO.
I THINK THE MESS IS USUALLY PEOPLE NO.
AND THAT'S WHERE, THAT'S WHAT CAUSED US TO GO BACK INTO THE, TO THE ORDINANCE AND LOOK AT IT, BECAUSE NOW IT'S GONNA BE ADDED ONTO THE APPLICATION THAT YOU CAN TABLE, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, THREE TI OR YOU CAN, YOU CAN TABLE UP TO 90 DAYS.
90 DAYS, AND AFTER 90 DAYS YOU HAVE TO FILE FOR AN EXTENSION OR YOU HAVE TO START ALL OVER.
SO WE'RE TRYING TO P THE WORD WILL GET OUT THAT WHEN WE'RE ASKING FOR SOMETHING, THIS THE PLANNING BOARD WE NEED.
AND I FEEL THAT THERE'S AN INCONSISTENCY TO PEOPLE SAYING, YEAH, TABLE IT FOR TWO WEEKS, TABLE IT FOR TWO WEEKS, TABLE IT FOR TWO WEEKS, AND THEN THERE'S OTHER PEOPLE THAT WANNA COME.
AND WE'RE, AND WE'RE NOT BECAUSE THERE'S, WE'RE MISSING THE OPPORTUNITY TO HEAR EVERYONE.
SO LIKE TONIGHT, I UNDERSTAND THINGS HAPPEN AND YOU MAY SAY, WELL, OKAY, SO IF YOU WANNA COME IN TWO WEEKS, THAT'S FINE, WE'LL PUT IT ON THE AGENDA.
BUT IF THEY DON'T HAVE IT IN TWO WEEKS, THEN THEY HAVE TO CALL AND LET US KNOW WHEN THEY HAPPEN.
WE'RE NOT REFUSING TO SEE ANYBODY.
AND I WANNA STATE THAT VERY CLEARLY.
WE WANT PEOPLE TO BE PREPARED WHEN THEY COME.
THAT'S ALL I, SO WE TABLE IT FOR TWO WEEKS, THEN IF THEY DON'T HAVE IT FOR THAT TWO WEEKS, THEN THEY DON'T GET ON UNTIL THEY HAVE THE STUFF.
HAVE WE TABLE IT IN, TABLE IT INDEFINITELY OR UNTIL THEY SEND US SOMETHING? WELL, WE CAN'T TABLE IT.
WELL, WE, YES, IN MY OPINION, MY, MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE STATE LAW IS THIS, THIS TYPE OF THING IS A HUNDRED PERCENT YOUR DISCRETION.
SO IT'S NICE THAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR OUR OPINIONS, BUT ULTIMATELY IT'S GONNA BE YOUR CALL AT THE END.
SO IF THAT'S WHAT YOU WANNA DO, THEN THAT'S HOW WE DO IT.
YOU'RE YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT.
AND, AND WHAT I, WHAT I WANTED TO COMMENT ON IS, UM, YOU KNOW, THIS IS POLICY.
UM, EVEN THE IDEA OF AN AGENDA WHEN IT'S A MEETING AND NOT AD HEARING IS POLICY.
FOR EXAMPLE, THE THINGS ON TODAY'S, ON TODAY'S LIST, UM, HAMBURG HONDA IS NOT A HEARING.
UM, AND THEN, UM, THE, THE MOD WASH IS NOT A HEARING, IT'S A, YOU KNOW, DISCUSSION ON COMMENTS.
THOSE AREN'T THAT, THAT MAYBE, BUT I MEAN THE WAY, THE WAY THE LAW IS WRITTEN IN O OPEN MEETINGS LAW NOTICE IS SIMPLY IT, IT'S NOT, UM, IT DOESN'T MEAN LEGAL NOTICE.
IT DOESN'T REQUIRE THE AGENDA.
SO WHETHER, UM, THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CHAIR, UM, WANTS TO RESTRICT THAT, YOU KNOW, ARE YOU ON THE AGENDA OR NOT BASED ON THAT TIMELINE, IT'S COMPLETELY AT A DISCRETIONARY POLICY.
THE ONLY THING I RECOMMEND IS IF YOU DO A POLICY LIKE THAT, EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT A WRITTEN LAW, THAT THE POLICY IS WRITTEN DOWN SOMEWHERE.
SO IT'S CONSISTENT FROM PARTY TO PARTY.
BECAUSE THE WORST THING THAT CAN HAPPEN IS THAT IT'S APPLIED INCONSISTENTLY.
THAT'S WELL, AND THAT'S WHY THE DISCUSSION, SO YOU CAN DO, RIGHT, SO YOU COULD DO ALMOST ANYTHING YOU WANT THAT'S NOT SPECIFICALLY OUTLINED IN MUNICIPAL HOME RULE LAW.
IT'S NOT SPECIFICALLY OUTLINED IN, IN UH,
[00:20:01]
UH, THE OPEN MEETING LAW SECTIONS AS AND OTHER SECTIONS.UM, THEN YOU CAN DO WHATEVER YOU WANT.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I EXPERIENCED IN THE LAST COUPLE OF MONTHS, WHICH CAUSED KIND OF A CRAZINESS, IS THAT SOMEBODY WOULD CALL AT THE LAST MINUTE AND SAY, CAN I BE ADDED? AND THEY'D GET ADDED AND THEN, BUT THEY GET ADDED TO THE WORK SESSION.
BUT WE SAW THEM BEFORE, SO THAT'S WHY THIS CONVERSATION, I WANTED TO DRAW THE LINE ON THINGS THAT WE HAVEN'T SEEN BEFORE.
AND THAT, AND THEN, AND THEN THEY CALL AND ASK TO BE PUT ON THE AGENDA AND THEN THEY TABLE IT.
THEY DON'T HAVE THE INFORMATION.
I MEAN, IF, IF THE BODY SAYS WE WANT AT LEAST 72 HOURS OR, I MEAN THERE'S, BECAUSE THERE'S NOTHING THERE THAT SAYS TO GET ON THE AGENDA, THAT HAS TO BE SO MUCH FINE.
YOU CAN CREATE THAT TIMELINE YOURSELF FOR, FOR THE PURPOSE OF AN ORDERLY, WE, WE HAVE A POLICY
AND, AND AGAIN, IT'S, IT IS POLICY.
IT'S NOT THERE, THERE IS A STATE LAW THAT ANY DOCUMENT WE CONSIDER IS SUPPOSED TO BE PUBLISHED.
I THINK IT'S 24 HOURS BEFORE THE MEETING.
SO WE MADE THE POLICY OF HAVING THE DOCUMENTS THE FRIDAY AHEAD, AHEAD OF TIME.
SO WE'D HAVE TIME FOR IT TO GET IT POSTED TO MEET THAT LAW.
WELL, AND AND FOR EXAMPLE, I'M, I'M GONNA USE IT ALCHEMY FOR AN EXAMPLE.
IF, IF, YOU KNOW, WE WERE AT A A POINT, JOSH WE'LL RECALL WHERE, UM, IF THEY HAD TO SUBMIT AN UPDATED SITE PLAN, UM, AND THEN THE NEXT MEETING WOULD'VE BEEN TOO SOON BECAUSE THE PUBLIC IS ENTITLED TO 10 DAYS TO REVIEW A SITE PLAN THAT'S BEEN SUBMITTED BEFORE THE BOARD CAN ACT ON IT.
NOW IT DOESN'T MEAN YOU COULDN'T HAVE THEM COME TO THE MEETING TO DISCUSS THE SITE PLAN, BUT THE BOARD JUST COULDN'T, COULDN'T ACT ON IT UNTIL THAT 10 DAY PERIOD WAS UP.
SO IT WAS, YOU KNOW, THEY, THEY COULD'VE MEET THE, MET THE POLICY, THE 72 HOUR POLICY, UM, TO GET THE DOCUMENTS IN.
BUT THEN THE FOLLOWING WEDNESDAY, THE BOARD COULDN'T HAVE DONE ANYTHING ANYWAYS.
THEY WOULD'VE BEEN HANDCUFFED BECAUSE OF THAT OTHER SECTION OF LAW THAT SAYS 10 DAYS.
WELL, THAT, THAT WAS IN THE PROCESS OF BEING CHANGED ON TO FIVE
SO WE TOOK CARE OF THAT THIS AFTERNOON FOR EXEMPT.
I WOULD LIKE TO ADD ONE OTHER AMENDMENT TO WHAT SHOULD BE ALLOWED ON THE WORK SESSION.
IF SOMEBODY HAS COME BEFORE US IN A WORK SESSION AND THEY HAVE CHANGES, BUT THEY HAVE NOT YET BEEN READY TO FILE A FULL SITE PLAN APPLICATION, NO ONE THAT HAS NOT FILED A FULL SITE PLAN APPLICATION SHOULD BE ON THE WEB SESSION.
SO BOB SMITH COMES IN AND HE'S PRESENTING A, A BIG, I DON'T KNOW, MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT OR SOMETHING AND HE CAME FOR FEEDBACK AND INPUT AND THEN HE'S MADE SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES AND HE WANTS ANOTHER ROUND OF WORK SESSION.
WE TYPICALLY, IN THE PAST, IF SOMEBODY HAS WANTED PLANNING BOARD INPUT BUT HAS NOT YET HAD THE DETAIL LEVEL TO FILE A FULL SITE PLAN APPLICATION, THEY COME ON THE WORK SESSION, THEY WOULD BE THE EXCEPTION.
'CAUSE WE WOULDN'T BE VOTING ON ANYTHING.
BUT THEY TYPICALLY COME BACK TO THE WORK SESSION FOR DISCUSSION.
WE WOULDN'T BE, SO THEY WOULD, THEY WOULD COME BACK IN THAT CASE BECAUSE THEY'RE ASKING FOR AN ATTORNEY THEY'RE ASKING FOR, BUT THEY WOULD COME BACK ON THE WORK WORK SESSION, WE BRING THEM BACK ON THE WORK SESSION.
THEY WOULDN'T COME BACK TO THE REGULAR MEETING.
'CAUSE THEY'RE STILL ASKING FOR INPUT.
THAT'S THE WHOLE IDEA OF THE WORK SESSION.
IS FOR, FOR CASES THAT THEY'RE IN THE PROCESS TOO.
WE GIVE, WE GIVE APPLICANTS THE THE CHOICE.
YOU CAN EITHER PAY A SKETCH PLAN, DIRECTION FEE, MEANING YOU JUST PAY THE, WHATEVER IT IS NOW, I DON'T KNOW SINCE I LEFT $300 OR WHATEVER IT IS, 200 AND YOU CAN COME AND DISCUSS.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO HAVE A SECRET FORM.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO HAVE FULL SITE PLANS.
THEN WHEN YOU'RE COMFORTABLE WITH THE DIRECTION YOU'VE BEEN GIVEN AND YOU WANNA FILE A SITE PLAN AND SEEKER ALL THAT, THEN YOU PAY SITE PLAN FEES.
SOME PEOPLE GO STRAIGHT TO THAT SITE PLAN FEE 'CAUSE THEY'RE COMFORTABLE WITH THEIR PLAN.
THEY STILL HAVE TO GO TO THE WORK SESSION ONCE.
SO YOU CAN GO AS MANY TIMES AS YOU WANT UNTIL YOU GET COMFORTABLE WITH THE BOARD'S INPUT.
BUT WE HAVEN'T HAD TOO MANY OF THOSE.
WE'VE HAD SEVERAL OVER THE YEARS THAT HAVE DONE THAT.
AND PEOPLE ASK TO COME BACK, BUT I JUST WANNA BE CLEAR THAT JUST BECAUSE SOMEBODY'S COME ONCE DOESN'T MEAN THEY HAVE TO COMPLETE SITE PLAN OF THEIR NEXT MEETING.
THEY CAN'T DO THAT UNTIL SUCH TIME AS THEY FILE THE SITE PLAN APPLICATION
SO I THINK THAT, UM, BASED ON THIS DISCUSSION, I'M COMFORTABLE WITH THE, ONCE THEY COME TO US AND THEY ASK FOR A TABLE THE SECOND TIME, IF THEY COME CONVERSATION AND YOU TWO THAT ARE SHAKING YOUR HEAD AND THEY HAVE TO REMIND THE CHAIR THAT WE ARE NOT GONNA PUT IT ON A DATE AUTOMATICALLY.
UNTIL THEY HAVE THE INFORMATION AND, AND AND WHAT'S OUR POLICY ON CONDITIONAL APPROVAL? I'VE, I'VE NEVER LIKED THEM.
BUT WHAT, WHAT'S OUR POLICY OR DO WE HAVE ONE? WELL YOU ALWAYS ALMOST ALWAYS HAVE SOME IONS LIKE CANDY'S LETTER AND WELL, YEAH, I MEAN THAT, THAT'S A GIVEN.
[00:25:01]
CONDITIONS BESIDES IT? YEAH, LIKE IF, IF THEY NEED SOMETHING FROM THE, FROM THE ZONING BOARD.YOU KNOW, OR IF THEY NEED SOMETHING FROM THE DE CAPB, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, I'M VERY UNCOMFORTABLE GIVING CONDITIONAL APPROVAL, BUT SOMETIMES PEOPLE TAKE THAT AS OH, WE GOT IT.
YOU KNOW, AND THAT'S UP TO CAP IS ADVISORY.
SO THEY'RE NOT GONNA BE ISSUING APPROVALS.
AND WE AS THIS BOARD SHOULD NOT BE ISSUING ANY APPROVALS FOR SOMETHING THAT REQUIRES A VARI ZONING VARIANCE THAT HASN'T YET BEEN ISSUED.
I THINK WHAT DENNIS IS TALKING ABOUT WILL ROUTINELY SAY THE LANDSCAPING PLAN SHOULD BE REVIEWED BY THE CAB AND THAT'S ONE OF THE CONDITIONS.
SO, SO THAT'S, THAT'S SOMETHING WHERE WE DO A CONDITIONAL BASED ON INPUT FROM THE CAB THAT WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED YET.
SAME AS LIKE IT'S ALL CONTINGENT ON ENGINEERING REVIEW AND FINAL PLANS AS WELL.
I MEAN, IT ALL GOES AS PART OF THAT.
WE DON'T SEND IT TO ENGINEERING UNTIL, LIKE FOR EXAMPLE, WE HAVE A CONDITION THAT SAYS LANDSCAPE PLAN NEEDS TO BE REVIEWED BY THE CAB.
WE DON'T PASS IT ON ENGINEERING UNTIL WE'VE CHECKED ALL OUR BOXES ON.
EVERYTHING HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY WHAT NEEDS TO BE REVIEWED BY.
SO WE DON'T LET IT GET TO THE NEXT LEVEL UNTIL ALL THE CONDITIONS ARE APPROVED ANYWAY.
SO, AND THEN WHERE, WHERE DO WE GO WHEN THERE'S, WHEN THERE'S A SITE PLAN AND, AND THE THE BUILDING IS DONE AND, AND THERE'S STUFF ON THERE THAT WAS NOT ON THE SITE PLAN.
DO DO WE COME BACK TO THE, TO YOU GUYS TO GO TO CODE ENFORCEMENT OR DO WE GO RIGHT TO CODE ENFORCEMENT? THAT'S UP TO YOU.
BECAUSE THERE'S SOME THINGS THAT, THAT I SEE ON THE STREET THAT THE WEREN'T APPROVED AND ALL THE THINGS THAT WERE APPROVED, LIKE THE LIGHTS, THE PINK AND GREEN LIGHTS THAT THE CAR WASH.
A FENCE THAT THE BANK OVER, UH, THE, UH, IN DEVELOPMENT BY TOPS, THERE WAS NOTHING IN THERE ON A FENCE.
THEY NEVER GOT A PERMIT FOR IT.
SO I'M JUST WONDERING WHAT OUR WHAT, WHAT FOLLOW UP WE CAN DO TO MAKE SURE THAT ONCE WE APPROVE IT, YOU KNOW, THEY DON'T GO MAKE A LOT OF CHANGES.
WE HAD THE ONE WITH THE FENCE WITH WENZEL.
HE PUT UP A FENCE AND, AND I WENT AND HE LOOKED AT BEHIND IT.
HE'S, HE'S GOT A CONNECTED GAS GRILL TO THE GAS LINE.
HE'S GOT STAMP CONCRETE PAD AND THEN THAT WASN'T PART OF THE SITE PLAN.
SO YEAH, WE HAD TO ACTUALLY MAKE HIM AMEND THAT SITE PLAN.
SO I MEAN THERE'S THINGS THAT ARE OUT THERE THAT SOMEBODY'S NOT CATCHING IT AND, AND I JUST FEEL BAD WHEN I SEE IT AND I SAID, WAIT A MINUTE, THAT'S NOT WHAT WE SAID THEY COULD DO.
AND SO I COULD TO INPUT A LITTLE BIT, SOMETIMES DURING ENGINEERING REVIEW THERE ARE SOME MINOR SITE PLAN CHANGES OR EVEN WHEN THEY GO TO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT, LIKE I HAVE WITH ME THE SIGNED SITE PLANS FOR THE JOHNSON'S LANDING PARKING LOT EXPANSION WHILE CODE DETERMINED THAT THEIR SETBACK WAS OFF AT ONE CO ONE SPOT.
SO THEY'VE LOST LIKE TWO ADDITIONAL PARKING SPACES OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
SO IF YOU, I, I MEAN THAT MIGHT NOT BE SOMETHING THAT SAYS VISUALLY NOTICEABLE AS LIKE A FENCE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
BUT WE HAD THEM, YOU KNOW, REVISE THAT RESUBMIT OCCASIONALLY THERE'S A MINOR THING WHERE THEY, THEY'RE SLIGHTLY CHANGING LIKE SOMETHING IN THE FRONT AND WE WORK WITH THEM AND USUALLY WE TRY TO DOCUMENT IT ON OUR END BECAUSE ENGINEERING DOES THE INSPECTION OF THE SITE WHEN IT'S FINISHED.
I THINK ALL DENNIS'S EXAMPLES ARE FAR DIFFERENT THAN THAT THOUGH.
THAT'S A FENCE THAT WAS NEVER PLANNED.
WE, IF IF ANYTHING LIKE THAT FENCE AND CONCRETE PAD AND SO ON SOUNDS LIKE IT WAS A LITTLE BIT LARGER, WHICH IS WHY IT COMES TO YOU GUYS.
TYPICALLY WE WOULD DISCUSS IT AND DECIDE IF IT WAS SOMETHING WE EVER FELT WAS SIGNIFICANT.
SO WE'VE HAD THOSE DISCUSSIONS IN THE PAST WHERE IT'S LIKE, OH, THEY'RE GONNA ADJUST THIS CURVE EVER SO SLIGHTLY.
I THINK THAT'S A WASTE OF THE BOARD'S TIME TO LOOK AT A ONE FOOT ADJUSTMENT TO OCCUR.
BUT AGAIN, ESPECIALLY IF MAYBE IT'S PARKING RELATED.
IF THEY WANTED TO LOSE PARKING SPACES FOR SOME REASON AND YOU KNOW, YOU GUYS MAKE THE DETERMINATION ON HOW MANY PARKING SPACES.
SO MAYBE IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE FEEL THAT YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT OR A MORE SIGNIFICANT STRUCTURE LIKE A FENCE OR SOMETHING VISUALLY, UH, DIFFERENT.
IF THEY DO IT OUTSIDE OF THAT, THEN THEY'RE DOING IT OUTSIDE OF THAT.
AND WELL THIS IS, WE WE MADE 'EM DO A LANDSCAPE PLAN AND THEN THEY PUT A FENCE BETWEEN THE LANDSCAPE AND THE STREET.
SO ALL YOU SEE IS THIS UGLY FENCE.
NO ENFORCEMENT DOESN'T COME TO US, THAT GOES TO CODE ENFORCEMENT AND THEY'VE REFERRED BACK TO US.
BUT THAT SHOULD ALL GO TO CODE ENFORCEMENT.
IT'S NOT, I I HAVE EMAILS THE PUBLIC CAN GO TO CODE ENFORCEMENT.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT YEAH, YEAH.
WE TRY TO CATCH IT LIKE LANDSCAPE IS A BIG ONE.
WE'VE GONE TO SITES WHERE THEY WANT FINAL CO AND THEY WANT FINAL ENGINEERING INSPECTION AND THEY HAVEN'T PLANTED ONE TREE THAT'S ON THEIR LANDSCAPE PLANT.
AND OTHER TIMES, YOU KNOW, WE GO OUT THERE AND THEY PLANTED THEM ALL OVER IN THIS CORNER WHEN THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO BE, YOU KNOW, SPREAD OUT THINGS LIKE THAT.
NOW WHAT THEY DO AFTER THEY GET ALL THOSE APPROVALS, THAT'S A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT STORY.
LIKE, THAT'S MUCH HARDER TO CATCH IF SOMEONE, IF YOU SAY 10 TREES AND THEY PLANT, PLANT IT ALL, IT PASSES AND THEY DECIDE THREE YEARS DOWN THE ROAD, THEY DON'T LIKE ONE OF THOSE TREES AND THEY TAKE IT DOWN.
WE'RE NOT CHECKING ON THEM FOR THE REST OF THEIR LIVES.
SO THAT CAN BE SOMETHING THAT THEY GO IN AND DO.
[00:30:01]
PEOPLE TO TELL US SOMETHING'S UP WITH THIS SITE.I DON'T DRIVE BY THAT GUY THAT, UH, CAR WASH EVERY DAY.
HOW IS I EVER SUPPOSED TO SEE THAT? IT'S THE RESIDENTS OF THE TOWN WHO CAN SEE THOSE THINGS AND REPORT IT.
WELL THANK YOU FOR THAT DISCUSSION EVERYBODY.
BUT IT'S A LITTLE AFTER SEVEN AND I NEED TO CALL THE, UH, JUNE 19TH TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD MEETING TO ORDER.
WOULD YOU PLEASE ALL RISE? I PLEDGE THE ANCE, THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
DAN SW PRESENT CHAIR GROIN PRESENT CHAPMAN PRESENT.
HAVING SAID THAT, UM, IF EVERYBODY'S GRABBED THE AGENDAS, YOU'LL NOTICE THAT OUR HAMBURG CONDO HAS BEEN TABLED AND OUR ALCHEMY SHORES HAS WITHDRAWN THEIR APPLICATION ALTOGETHER.
THEY WILL NOT BE BACK IN FRONT OF THE PLANNING BOARD, UM, UH, AT THIS TIME.
SO WE'VE BEEN NOTIFIED THAT THEY ARE WITHDRAWING THEIR APPLICATION.
SO OUR FIRST CASE THIS EVENING IS, UM, PEOPLE INC REQUESTING A MINOR SUBDIVISION APPROVAL ON A TWO LOT SUBDIVISION.
ARE THE PEOPLE HERE FOR PEOPLE INC.
DOESN'T SOUND AS GOOD, GOOD EVENING CHAIRPERSON AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING BOARD.
YOU HAVE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS DURING YOUR MEETING TWO WEEKS AGO, AND IT'S A RELATIVELY SIMPLE REQUEST.
YOU'VE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED THE SITE PLAN FOR PEOPLE INC.
AND YOU REAPPROVED IT AFTER THE PROJECT WAS SCALED BACK.
THEY FINALLY HAVE ALL THEIR FUNDING IN PLACE.
AND BASICALLY ALL WE'RE PROPOSING IS TO CREATE A NEW PARCEL.
AND THE REASON WE'RE DOING THAT IS THE CURRENT PROJECT SITE IS MADE UP OF SEVERAL PARCELS.
WE'RE GONNA DO THAT VIA CREATION OF A DEED.
AND WE'RE ASKING, BECAUSE IT IS ONLY ONE PARCEL, UM, YOU'D WAIVE THE REQUIREMENT TO FILE A MAP COVER AT THE COUNTY CLERK'S OFFICE.
BUT OF COURSE WE WILL PROVIDE YOU WITH A RECORDED COPY OF THE DEED ONCE THAT HAS OCCURRED.
AND THE GOAL IS TO BE ABLE TO START THIS, START CONSTRUCTION OF THIS PROJECT IN THE RELATIVELY NEAR FUTURE FUTURE.
DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO OFFER? NO, WE DON'T.
SO WE HAVE A, AN AMENDMENT OR RESOLUTION, SORRY? UH, PUBLIC HEARING.
SO WE HAVE PUBLIC, IT'S JUST ONE JOB.
DO YOU HAVE YOUR PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE READY? NO, WE DON'T HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE AND WE HAVE NO INTERNET.
OH WAIT, HE I'M SURE HE'S GOT IT.
SO BEFORE YOU DO THAT, LET ME READ THIS.
A PUBLIC HEARING IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE COMMUNITY TO SHARE INFORMATION ON HOW YOU, HOW YOU ARE IMPACTED BY A PROJECT.
A THREE MINUTE RULE WILL APPLY DURING A PUBLIC HEARING TO ENSURE THAT ALL RESIDENTS ARE HEARD DURING A REASONABLE HOUR.
IT IS NOT A QUESTION AND ANSWER PERIOD.
ALL STATEMENTS MADE DURING A PUBLIC HEARING AS WELL AS WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE REGARDING THAT PROJECT SENT TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT ARE REVIEWED BY THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE APPLICANT.
AND DENNIS, WOULD YOU LIKE TO READ THE NOTICE? NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD WILL CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING ON A PROPOSAL BY PEOPLE INC.
TO CREATE A TWO LOT SUBDIVISION TO BE LOCATED ON VACANT LAND, THE WEST SIDE OF ROGERS ROAD.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WOULD BE HELD ON JUNE 19TH, 2024 IN ROOM SEVEN B OF HAMBURG TOWN HALL.
IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WISHES TO MAKE COMMENT ON THIS CASE? COME ON UP.
WE UNFORTUNATELY DON'T HAVE OUR PODIUM TONIGHT.
WE'RE MORE THAN HAPPY TO HEAR, HEAR YOU THIS EVENING.
UH, MY NAME'S JOSH COLLINS, JUST AN AVERAGE GUY.
UM, I'M HERE TO OPPOSE THE COMBINATION OF THE LOT FOR THEIR DEED AND, OKAY.
UM, WHAT I BROUGHT WAS SIGNATURES FROM THE PRESIDENTS OF THE PINE GROVE, HOA REQUESTING DENIAL OF THEIR, OF PEOPLE INCS PETITION.
UM, THE SIGNATURE OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE BRIARWOOD, HOA REQUESTING DENIAL OF THE PETITION,
[00:35:01]
THE SIGNATURE OF THE BRIARCLIFF, HOA REQUESTING DENIAL OF THE PETITION AND THE REQUESTING OF, UM, THE SAWG GREENS.THAT'S ABOUT 2000 RESIDENTS THAT THESE HOAS REPRESENT, REQUESTING THAT PEOPLES INC PETITION BE DENIED.
I REQUEST THAT IT BE, UM, PUT ON HOLD FOR 60 DAYS.
THE HOAS CAN CONSULT WITH EACH OTHER 'CAUSE THEY HAVE MULTIPLE HOAS WHO HAVE THE ABILITY TO POOL MONEY TOGETHER THROUGH RETAIN LEGAL COUNSELOR, THROUGH BCHA AND BCHA OR, UH, LAW FOR KEENING LAW FIRM.
SO THEY CAN HAVE REPRESENT, REPRESENT REPRESENTATION FOR THIS.
I UNDERSTAND THIS PROCESS IS VERY FAR DOWN THE ROAD ALREADY, AND THIS IS PRETTY MUCH THE FINAL STEP BEFORE THEY CAN START CONSTRUCTION.
AND YOU KNOW, I APOLOGIZE THAT WE ARE LATE TO THE FIGHT IN THIS, BUT I'LL JUST GIVE YOU ONE QUICK EXAMPLE ABOUT BEING LATE TO THE FIGHT.
WHEN I WAS IN IRAQ, WE WERE DOING A CONVOY AND WE WERE HIT WITH AN IED.
IT TOOK 15 MINUTES FOR THE APACHE HELICOPTERS TO GIVE US AIR SUPPORT.
AND THE PILOT SAID, WE'RE SORRY THAT WE'RE LATE TO THE FIGHT.
YOU'RE NEVER LATE AS LONG AS YOU SHOW UP.
YOU ARE THE LAST LINE OF DEFENSE HERE FOR THIS PEOPLE'S INC.
THEY'VE BEEN PLANNING THIS FOR YEARS, AND NOW THEY'RE JUST COMING TO COMBINE THESE LOTS SO THEY CAN BUILD IT.
YOU CAN HALT IT FOR NOW FOR 60 DAYS UNTIL THESE HOAS AND THE RESIDENTS THAT ALL LIVE BEHIND IT CAN GET TOGETHER AND COME UP WITH A PLAN TO HELP FIGHT IT.
ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS DENY THEIR PETITION AND THEY CAN'T BUILD IT.
THEY NEED, THEY NEED YOU TO APPROVE THIS WITHOUT YOUR APPROVAL TODAY.
THEY CANNOT CONTINUE THEIR CONSTRUCTION.
WE'RE JUST ASKING, JUST HALT IT TWO MONTHS.
WHAT, WHAT ARE THE OBJECTIONS? HANG ON.
YOU CAN'T TO VOICE HIS OPINION.
AND WE DON'T GET TO ASK ANY QUESTIONS.
DO YOU HAVE, THE ONLY QUESTION I HAVE IS DO YOU HAVE THE WRITTEN LETTERS FROM THE HOAS? NO, NO WRITTEN LETTERS.
UM, I GOT THE SIGNATURES, UM, ABOVE IT.
I NEED LETTERS FROM ALL OF THE MEMBERS OF THE, FROM THE HOAS.
IF THE PRESIDENTS WROTE THOSE LETTERS, THEN THEY NEED TO WRITE IT OUT AND ADDRESS IT TO THE BOARD.
CAN CAN YOU GIVE US 30 DAYS? I I CAN'T GIVE YOU ANYTHING RIGHT NOW.
THAT'S WHAT, IN THE FUTURE, IF YOU'RE GONNA PRESENT SOMETHING TO THE BOARD, IT HAS TO BE LETTERS BY THE HOA.
WE'RE GONNA CONTINUE WITH THE PUBLIC HEARING AND WE'LL HAVE A DISCUSSION.
I CAN'T, CAN'T, IT'S NOT AN ANSWER QUESTION.
CAN CAN I ASK A QUESTION ON A PUBLIC HEARING? SO, RIGHT.
DO YOU GUYS VOTE TODAY TO APPROVE OR DENY IT? OR IS IT JUST THE PUBLIC HEARING? NO, IT'S JUST THE PUBLIC HEARING.
SO THEY'RE NOT GONNA GET APPROVAL TODAY? WHAT? I GUESS, SIR, IT'S JUST A PUBLIC HEARING.
WE, SO WE'RE GONNA, WE ARE NOT, WE CAN'T DO DIALOGUE.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE? LIKE, COULD I RESPOND? YEAH.
CHAD, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE BESIDES THE PETITIONER THAT WISHES TO MAKE, UM, COMMENTS ON THIS CASE? SARAH, DON'T GO TOO FAR 'CAUSE I'M GONNA NEED YOU HERE IN A MINUTE.
FINAL CALL FOR ANYONE ELSE FROM THE PUBLIC THAT WAS JUST TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE.
I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
SARAH, CAN YOU GIVE US AN UPDATE ON THIS, UM, PROJECT? THE PROJECT ITSELF? YES.
IT WAS APPROVED IN DECEMBER, I THINK OF 2022.
IT DID NOT NEED SUBDIVISION APPROVAL AT THAT TIME BECAUSE THERE WERE SEVERAL PIECES OF PROPERTY THAT WERE COMBINED INTO A NUMBER THAT WAS LESS THAN WHAT THEY STARTED WITH.
SO THE PLANNING BOARD DIDN'T REQUIRE SUBDIVISION APPROVAL.
THEY NEED APPROVAL NOW BECAUSE OF THEIR FUNDING SOURCE.
SO THIS IS, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANNA SAY TECHNICALITY, BUT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT THEY NEED IN ORDER TO GET THEIR FUNDING THAT WE DON'T REQUIRE.
CAN I ASK A CLARIFYING QUESTION ABOUT WHAT YOU SAID? MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU JUST SAID.
SO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS, BUT FOR THEIR FUNDING, THERE IS NO REASON THAT WE AS THIS BOARD, THEY WOULD BE OKAY TO CONSTRUCT WITHOUT THE SUBDIVISION.
UM, SO BASICALLY WHAT I WANTED TO HEAR, HEAR YOU SAY IS THAT THIS PROJECT HAS ALREADY BEEN APPROVED YES.
[00:40:01]
BUT THE PROJECT CANNOTAND AGAIN, I CAN'T, I CAN'T GO BACK AND FORTH WITH YOU.
WE HAVE YOU, YOU ALREADY SPOKEN IN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UM, SEAN WOULD, DO YOU HAVE ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OF THIS? YES.
I JUST, I JUST WANNA KNOW FOLLOWING UP ON THE COMMENT THAT SARAH MADE, THIS IS LITERALLY JUST A MATTER OF DUE DILIGENCE JUST TO SHOW PAPERWORK THAT IT IS A LEGAL PARCEL.
KEEP IN MIND, THIS IS A STRANGE SUBDIVISION THAT WE'RE ACTUALLY NOT CREATING ANY NEW PARCELS WHATSOEVER.
UM, I ACKNOWLEDGE THERE MAY BE SOME OPPOSITION, BUT UNFORTUNATE FOR THEM IT'S TOO LATE.
THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS CHALLENGE ANY OF THE APPROVALS THAT HAVE BEEN PREVIOUSLY GRANTED.
THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW, AS YOU REMEMBER, THE TOWN BOARD WAS INVOLVED.
THE PUD AMENDMENT EXPIRED A LONG, LONG, LONG AGO.
I HAVEN'T ACTUALLY HEARD A, A VALID SUBSTANTIVE REASON FOR ANY DELAY.
SO WE THINK THAT THIS VERY MINISTERIAL MATTER SHOULD BE APPROVED THIS EVENING.
JUST ONE THING, SIR, WE HAVE A PROCESS THAT WE HAVE TO FOLLOW.
I'M NOT TRYING TO BE DIFFICULT HERE, BUT I CAN'T BREAK THE RULE FOR YOU AND THEN NOT DO IT FOR SOMEBODY ELSE.
AND WHEN I CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, THAT'S THE PROCESS.
AND RESPECTFULLY, I'M TRYING TO FILE THE PROCESS.
SO I TREAT ALL THE RESIDENTS THE SAME.
FELIX SAY SOMETHING, HEARING HAS BEEN CLOSED.
IS THERE ANY, UM, BOARD MEMBERS, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD TO THIS? NO.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO READ IT? YEAH.
TOWN OF HAMBURG RECEIVED A MINOR SUBDIVISION APPLICATION FROM PEOPLE INC.
THAT IS ASSOCIATED WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF A MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECT THAT IS LOCATED NEAR SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD WEST OF RO ROGERS ROAD.
THE HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE NEW YORK STATE SEEKER LAW AND THE SEEKER REGULATIONS CONTAINED AT SIXTH NY CRR PART SIX 17.
AND THE TOWN BOARD HAS PREVIOUSLY ISSUED A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE PROJECT.
AFTER COMPLETING A COORDINATED ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW, THE PLANNING BOARD HAS REVIEWED THE SUBDIVISION APPLICATION AGAINST THE SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENTS OF THE TOWN.
THE INPUT RECEIVED FROM VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS AND HELD PRIOR TO PUBLIC HEARING ON 6 19 24.
THE HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD HEREBY ISSUES MINOR SUBDIVISION APPROVAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER TWO 30 WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS.
SIDEWALKS ARE NOT WARRANTED AS THEY ALREADY EXIST ALONG SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD.
A COPY OF THE DEED BY WHICH THE NEW PARCEL WILL BE CREATED WILL BE PROVIDED TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT ONCE THE DEED HAS BEEN REPORTED.
THE THEORY COUNTY CLERK'S OFFICE.
FINALLY, THE BR PLANNING BOARD WAIVES THE COMPLETION OF A FINAL PLAT AND FILING OF A MAP COVER.
AND THE HAM PLANNING BOARD CHAIR IS AUTHORIZED TO SIGN THE PRELIMINARY PLAT.
IT'S BEEN MOVED BY MEMBER SELECT, SECOND BY MEMBER MCCORMICK.
SO IT'S PRE-WRITTEN YOU, I HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING, RIGHT? IF YOU ALREADY PRE WROTE IT, I HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING.
OUR, UM, NEXT CASE, UM, PLANNING DEPARTMENT ON THE, UH, AGENDA.
IT DID NOT SAY PUBLIC HEARING.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE, I JUST WANNA CLARIFY, WHICH FOR PEOPLE INC IT DID NOT SAY PUBLIC HEARING ON THE AGENDA.
IT DID WELL, NOT THE ONE THAT I GOT THAT THEY GAVE ME.
SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S CHANGING, WHAT HEARING, PUBLIC HEARING IS WHAT I GOT.
THAT'S NOT THE WEEKS, THAT'S PROBABLY REGULAR AGENDA.
OH, I WISH YOU WOULD PUT IT AS A, OKAY.
SO NOW WE HAVE, UM, THE PLANNING BOARD TO DISCUSS THE PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED ON THE SUBMITTED DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR MOD CAR WASH AND BOARD MEMBERS.
YOU'LL NOTE THAT YOU RECEIVED, UM, YOU RECEIVED AN ENGINEERING REPORT FROM, UM, GH, AND THAT WAS ON THE, UM, NOISE IMPACT STUDY.
AND, UM, TAMMY, WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE COMMENT ON THAT? UH, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO OFFER? LET, MAYBE I SHOULD ASK THAT.
UH, THERE WAS ONE MINOR CORRECTION THAT WE FOLLOWED UP WITH AFTER THE WRONG SECTION OF THE TOWN CODE FOR NOISE IS REFERENCED.
[00:45:01]
THERE ARE SOME MINOR COMMENTS FROM OUR NOISE EXPERTS FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.SEPARATE FROM THAT, IT'S NOT MY EXPERTISE.
SO AGAIN, I'M NOT HERE TO ANSWER SPECIFIC QUESTIONS.
AND PART OF OUR PROPOSAL IS A CALL TO REVIEW, UH, IF THE BOARD FEELS LIKE THEY NEED TO ASK QUESTIONS DIRECTLY.
PLANNING DEPARTMENT, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ASK? UH, YES.
SO WE PRO WE PRODUCED A DOCUMENT, UM, THAT HAS, SO OUR PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD ENDED ON MONDAY 17TH.
UM, WE HAD ABOUT NINE OR 10 PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC.
MARGO PUT HER COMMENTS ON THE RECORDS, WE ADDED IT TO THE RECORD.
AND THE ONLY AGENCY THAT WE GOT A COMMENT FROM WAS THE NEW YORK STATE DEC.
UM, SO CLOSED AFTER THE CONCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.
UM, I ACTUALLY HAD CORIN HERE PUT THE COMMENTS TOGETHER FOR ME, UM, ONES THAT WERE SUBSTANTIVE AND THEN ONES THAT EVEN WE DIDN'T CONSIDER, UM, ALL IN ONE DOCUMENT.
AND, UM, WE'RE HERE TONIGHT TO DISCUSS COMMENTS FROM ANY OF THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD ON THE RECORD.
UM, AND THEN WE WILL FINALIZE THIS DOCUMENT, SEND IT TO YOU, SEND IT TO THE APPLICANT SO THAT THEY HAVE THE FIRST PREP AT DOING THE FEIS.
WHO WANTS TO GO FIRST? CAITLYN COMMENTS? MCC, MCCORMICK? UM, THE, THERE WERE, UM, I, I GUESS SIX COMMENTS THAT I HAD OF VARYING LEVELS.
AND THE FIRST ONE IS THAT, UH, WAIT, I HOLD YOU REAL QUICK.
DO YOU HAVE THIS LISTED THAT YOU SENT TO US OR ARE WE, ARE YOU JUST, I I CAN, THEY'RE ROUGHLY WRITTEN.
THEY, I'M GONNA GIVE YOU MORE COLOR VERBALLY THAN THEY'RE THERE.
BUT THIS SHOULD GIVE YOU A, SO THE FIRST ONE IS THAT I NOTICED IN THE TRAFFIC STUDY AND THAT, UM, THERE WERE TWO PIECES OF, OF CONCERNS.
ONE IS THAT THE, THE BASICALLY THE TEXT SAID EVERYTHING'S FINE, THERE'S NO PROBLEMS. BUT UNDER THE PROPOSED CONDITIONS, IT LOOKED LIKE THE LEVEL OF SERVICE DROPPED IN THIS, IN THE STUDY FOR ALMOST ALL OF THE AREAS DROPPED FROM ONE LETTER RATING TO THE NEXT LETTER RATING.
IN TERMS OF THE LEVEL OF SERVICE CHANGE, I THINK WE NEED TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT AND TALK ABOUT WHAT, WHAT THAT MEANS AND WHETHER OR NOT ANY MEDICS ARE WARRANTED.
UM, THE SECOND ITEM, UM, IS THAT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I, WE DID ON ONE OF THE OTHER PROJECTS AS A MITIGATION, UH, I THINK IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN A WESTFORD PROJECT WHERE WE TALKED ABOUT THE NIGHTTIME LIGHTING FOR PARKING LOTS AND THINGS AND THAT THEY HAD A, A, A DIMMING WHEN THEY WERE NOT IN BUSINESS HOURS.
SO THAT THEY HAD A MINIMUM LEVEL OF LIGHTING THAT THEY WERE REQUIRING BECAUSE OF SECURITY FOR THEIR INSURANCE, BUT THEY WERE ABLE TO REDUCE THAT TO A LOWER LEVEL THAN THE FULL LIGHTING WHEN THEY WERE IN OPERATIONS.
AND I THINK THAT THAT'S A LITIGANT THAT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED TO HAVE SOME SORT OF RECOGNIZING THAT THEY PROBABLY HAVE AN INSURANCE REQUIREMENT THAT'S GONNA REQUIRE SOME LEVEL OF LIGHTING.
BUT IT, WE SHOULDN'T NEED TO BE ON FULL BLAST WHEN THERE'S NOBODY THERE.
UM, AND UH, I'M GONNA JUMP TO NUMBER SIX ON MY LIST ONLY 'CAUSE IT'S RELATED TO THAT.
BASED ON WHEN I WAS LOOKING AT THINGS, WE DID NOT HAVE ANY NIGHTTIME SIMULATIONS.
AND I KNOW ONE OF THE COMPLAINTS THAT WE HAVE HEARD FROM THE PUBLIC HAS BEEN, UM, TALKING ABOUT LIGHTING IMPACTS AT NIGHT.
SO I THINK THAT LITIGANT GOES PARTIALLY WITH THAT AS WELL.
UM, AND MAKING SURE THAT WE FULLY UNDERSTAND, AND I, I MAY HAVE, I HAD A HARD TIME ON MY SCREEN LOOKING AT THE FULL DRAWINGS, BUT UNDERSTANDING WHERE THE ELEVATION OF THE LIGHTING IS RELATIVE TO THE FENCE WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE VARIOUS, UH, VANTAGE POINTS FROM OUR HOUSE, UM, ESPECIALLY IN THE, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE DAYTIME SIMULATION, ESPECIALLY LEAF OFF THE POLES AND THINGS SORT OF, THE STRUCTURE THEMSELVES BLEND IN.
BUT WHEN YOU HAVE LIGHT THAT, THAT IS POTENTIALLY MORE OF A, OF A CONCERN.
UM, SO JUST WANTED TO UNDERSTAND HOW SOME OF THAT THAT IS REPRESENTED.
SO JUST THAT THE VISUAL, UM, THE NIGHTTIME LIGHTING, BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S DIFFERENT THAN IT MAINTAINING COMMERCIAL AND THERE BEING LIGHTING ACROSS THE STREET THAT CLOSER PROXIMITY IS A LITTLE BIT OF CHANGE.
UM, THE THIRD ITEM THAT I HAD WAS ABOUT, UM, NOISE LEVELS.
THERE SEEMS TO BE SOMETHING WRONG, AND I HAVEN'T LOOKED AT ALL OF YOUR ENGINEERING COMMENTS YET.
THERE'S A TABLE THREE IN THE FRONT PART OF THE NOISE REPORT.
AND IT LOOKS LIKE, AND I MAY BE RE READING THIS INCORRECTLY, THAT THE BASELINE NOISE LEVELS ARE HIGHER THAN THE WIDTH, THE EQUIPMENT AND THE BOTTOM ROW OF JUST BECAUSE THE, THE SECOND TABLE MAKES SENSE TO ME.
BUT THE THIRD TABLE, SOMEBODY, WE JUST NEED THEM TO LOOK AT THAT TO MAKE SURE THAT, AND IF I AM UNDERSTANDING IT INCORRECTLY, MAYBE I CAN CHANGE IN GH HD TO BETTER UNDERSTAND IT.
BUT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT ON PAGE 23, THE STUDY, THE, WHEN YOU SAY TABLES TABLE TWO AND TABLE THREE ON PAGE 23, 3 OF THE APPENDIX OF THE NEW STUDY
[00:50:01]
IN THE APPENDIX, RIGHT? YES.SO YOU'LL SEE THAT THESE NUMBERS ARE ALL LOWER THAN THE BASELINE.
AND I WAS VERY CONFUSED BECAUSE YOU'LL NOTE HERE I THOUGHT THAT MEANT THAT THE BASELINE WAS COMING FROM ROUTE 20.
AND THAT THE TRAFFIC NOISE WAS LOUD AND THAT THE FENCE WILL REDUCE IT.
AND THE BUILDING WILL BLOCK IT.
THAT'S, THAT'S KIND OF HOW I WOULD, THAT'S HOW I CLARIFICATION IF WE CAN UNDERSTAND THAT.
AND BUT IF YOU DID SAY THAT ON TOP IT SAYS EXPLAIN EXPECTED A WEIGHTED SOUND LEVEL DUE TO MOD CAR, WASH EAST PROPERTY WITH AND WITHOUT SOLID FENCE.
WELL, YEAH, THIS ONE SAYS ON THE OTHER TABLE AS WELL, BUT IT'S JUST, IF THEY COULD JUST GET US SOME SORT OF CLARIFICATION ON THAT, IT WOULD AND, AND PLAIN LANGUAGE AND THIS IS SEEKER, THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.
WHAT ELSE? THE, THEY A COUPLE DIFFERENT TIMES TALK ABOUT, UM, AND I DON'T KNOW THIS IS RELEVANT FOR OUR REVIEW, BUT THEY OPENED IT SO I THINK WE SHOULD BE RESPONSIVE.
BUT THEY TALKED IN TWO DIFFERENT PLACES ONCE IN THEIR OPERATING PROCEDURES AND ONCE IN THE FRONT OF THE TEXT ABOUT THAT THEY WERE GONNA BE A COMMUNITY MEMBER AND HAVE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND PARTICIPATION.
AND THEN IN THEIR LIKE OPERATIONS PLAN, THEY, THEY BRING IT UP AGAIN AND IT'S ONE LINE THAT SAYS WE MIGHT SPONSOR SOME SPORTS TEAMS AND WE INTEND TO BE PART OF THE COMMUNITY.
AND IF, IF THAT'S ESPECIALLY PART OF THEIR, WHAT MAY BE PART OF A LITIGANT IS BEING PART OF THE COMMUNITY AND WITHIN THE COMMUNITY CHARACTER, I THINK IT WOULD BE WORTHWHILE FOR THEM TO EXPLAIN OR PROVIDE A BIT MORE CONTEXT THERE.
UM, AND THEN I, I THINK THAT THE OTHER SUBSTANTIVE COMMENT I HAVE IS WHERE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT COMMUNITY CHARACTER.
THERE'S A ZONING ORDINANCE THAT HAS RESTRICTIONS FROM RESIDENCES FOR CAR WASHES.
NOW THEY HAVE HAD A VARIANCE FROM THAT, BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT THE POLICY IS.
AND I THINK THAT WE NEED TO ADDRESS THAT SOMEHOW.
JUST BECAUSE THEY HAVE A VARIANCE DOESN'T MEAN THEY'RE MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS.
THEY'VE, THEY'VE CHANGED THE REQUIREMENT.
SO THAT WAS PRESUMABLY IN THERE FOR A PLACE.
AND I THINK THAT OUR FEIS NEEDS TO INCLUDE A DISCUSSION AND AN ANALYSIS OF IF HOW WE WANNA THINK ABOUT EVEN THEIR VARYING FROM WHAT THE STANDARD WAS SET FOR A REASON AND DOES THAT MAKE THEM STILL IN, IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE STANDARD.
AND THEN THE MINOR MORE ADMINISTRATIVE COMMENT I HAVE IS THERE'S SOME SUBJECTIVE LANGUAGE THAT IS, AS WE'VE SEEN ALL THESE EISS IS VERY MUCH ADVOCATING FOR THEIR PERSPECTIVE.
AND I THINK WE PROBABLY JUST NEED TO CALL OUT THAT THAT'S THE APPLICANT'S LANGUAGE.
THERE WAS, UM, A COMMENT IN THE SECTION, FOR EXAMPLE, ON THE VIEW SHED AND THE VISUAL RENDERINGS THAT INDICATED BASICALLY THAT THEY, NO ONE COULD FIND ANY ARGUMENT WITH THE STATEMENT.
AND I WAS LIKE, WE, THIS BOARD NEED TO NOT BE REPRESENTING STANDING BY A STATEMENT LIKE THAT.
I'M QUITE CONFIDENT THAT THE PUBLIC THAT WOULD'VE COME IN.
I DON'T, I DON'T, WE MAY HAVE STOOD BY SOME OF THE STATEMENTS OF FACTS IN THAT SECTION, BUT WE NEED TO REPRESENT THAT THAT'S NOT OUR LANGUAGE AND MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S CLEAR AS WE GO FORWARD.
ANYTHING ELSE? THAT WAS MY LIST.
YEAH, MY MINE WAS THE, THE NOISE LEVEL AND, AND I THINK CAITLYN, UH, CO COVERED THAT.
AND TAMMY, I DIDN'T GET TO READ YOUR, YOUR MEMO YET, BUT I DID CATCH THE LAST PART OF IT WHERE THERE'S THINGS THAT YOU RECOMMENDED THEY DO THAT THAT WOULD GO MORE WITH OUR ORDINANCE.
AND THEN THAT WAS BASICALLY WHAT I HAD AND, UH, THAT WAS IT.
FORGOT I, I WOULDN'T MIND SEEING A NIGHTTIME SIMULATION THAT ALIN SUGGESTED, ESPECIALLY AFTER THE LAST CAR WASH THAT DENNIS WON'T LET US FORGET WHAT HAPPENS AT NIGHT THERE.
SO, UM, ANYTHING ELSE DENNIS? NO, NOT FOR NOW.
THE, UH, THE ENGINEER'S CONCLUSION, UM, HAD 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 RECOMMENDATIONS.
UM, AND I'M GONNA GO THROUGH THEM.
THE APPLICANT NOISE STUDY MAKES NO MENTION OF ANY CRITERIA AND SIMPLY STATES THAT IT'S ASSESSED NOISE IMPACTS FROM THE PROPOSED MOD WASH IN COMPARISON TO THE BASELINE MONITORING.
THE NOISE SECTION OF THE DEIS INCORRECTLY COMPARES THE FACILITY NOISE IMPACTS TO OSHA EPA AND OTHER MUNICIPALITIES.
NOISE ORDINANCES OTHER THAN THE TOWN OF HAMBURG, GHD RECOMMENDS THAT THE APPLICANT'S NOISE STUDY BE UPDATED TO DOCUMENT AND COMPARE THE RESULTS AGAINST THE TOWN ORDINANCE.
[00:55:01]
I'M NOT GONNA READ THE NUMBER.UM, AND ACCORDING TO THE N-Y-S-D-E-C NOISE GUIDELINES TO DETERMINE COMPLIANCE, THE STUDY DID NOT EVALUATE THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5 3 9 3 SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD.
GHD RECOMMENDS THAT THE PROPERTY BE EVALUATED AND INCORPORATED IN THE STUDY TO CONFIRM COMPLIANCE AT IS DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THE PROPOSED CAR WASH AND SHARES A PROPERTY LINE.
AND THAT, AND THE REASON WHY I'M READING THIS IS BECAUSE MY FELLOW BOARD MEMBER OVER HERE TO MY RIGHT HAS BROUGHT UP A A GOOD POINT THAT I DIDN'T EVEN CATCH.
AND, UM, IN THE STUDY, IN THE, I'M SORRY IN THE STUDY, BUT IN THE MAP, IN THE SITE PLAN, THE, UM, THE STATIONS WHERE PEOPLE COME IN AND PAY ARE RIGHT.
I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW HOW FAR IT IS FROM THAT HOUSE ON 20, THE 48.1 FEET.
THAT'S THE CLOSER ONE, ISN'T IT? RIGHT, THE CLOSER.
AND WHAT IMPACT, THAT'S WHY WE NEED TO HAVE THE STUDY OF THE NOISE BECAUSE IT'S SO CLOSE ON THAT HOUSE.
WHAT IMPACT DOES THE PAY STATIONS HAVE NOISE LEVEL ON THAT HOUSE.
NOW, AND WHEN WE WERE LOOKING AT THIS, I SAID, YOU KNOW, WE HAVEN'T HEARD FROM THAT RESIDENT AT ALL, BUT STILL AGAIN, MEMBER CHAP AND REMINDED ME THAT WE'RE HERE TO REPRESENT ALL THE RESIDENTS.
AND JUST BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T HEARD FROM 'EM, WHEN I WENT BACK AND LOOKED AT THE MAP, THAT PAY STATION IS RIGHT THERE.
SO I EVEN LOOKED AT THE MAP AND THOUGHT IT'S TOO BAD THAT THEY CAN'T DO SOMETHING TO FLIP THAT.
SO IT DOESN'T HAVE SUCH A, UM, I HAD THIS MARKED AND NOW I CAN'T FIND IT.
UM, THAT THEY COULDN'T FLIP THAT SITE SO IT WOULDN'T HAVE SUCH AN IMPACT ON THAT HOUSE.
AND THEN THE DRYERS, UM, AND IT'S, IT'S NOT UP TO US TO RE REDESIGN THEIR PROJECT, BUT, UM, THAT'S A MAJOR CONCERN OF MINE AND ALONG WITH THIS NOISE STUDY AND I'M GLAD THAT THE ENGINEERING BROUGHT THAT UP.
UM, THE OTHER, UM, COMMENTS WERE THE GH UH, D RECOMMENDS THAT THE STUDY BE UPDATED TO PROVIDE A FIGURE SHOWING NOISE SOURCE LOCATIONS, ALL SOUND LEVEL DATA USED, MANUFACTURE SPECIFICATIONS AND REFERENCE LEVELS FOR THE VACUUM STALLS AND THE NOISE SOURCE HEIGHTS TO ENSURE THAT THE APPROPRIATE SOUND LEVER LEVELS WERE USED AND THE MODELING WAS COMPLETED APPROPRIATELY.
AND THAT'S ANOTHER GOOD POINT BECAUSE THOSE DRYERS, EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE USING THE LESS IMPACT AND THE LESS LOWEST DECIBELS, WHAT IMPACT DOES IT HAVE TO THE HOUSES BEHIND IT AND TO THAT HOUSE, UM, TO THE WEST? UM, GHD RECOMMENDS THAT THE STUDY BE UPDATED TO SHOW THE PROPOSED NOISE WALL LOCATION AND LENGTH, CONFIRM LINE OF SIGHT TO THE ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL AREA IS BLOCKED, AND PROVIDE DETAIL ON GENERAL GENERAL CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS FOR CONTRACTORS TO FOLLOW AS A DESIGN OF THE FACILITY PROCESSES.
SO ONCE I GOT DONE READING ALL THAT, UM, I, I THINK THIS IS ENOUGH TO, UM, THAT THIS NEEDS TO GET LOOKED AT PRETTY HEAVILY.
AND THOSE ARE THE ONLY COMMENTS THAT I HAVE AT THIS TIME.
CAN I ASK, UH, A FOLLOW UP QUESTION ABOUT SOME, I HAD SOME COMMENTS.
YOU PROBABLY HAVE THE MOST TIME, TIME INTENSIVE ONES.
THOSE ONES THAT CAME FROM THE ENGINEERS TO ADDRESS.
ONE OF THE THINGS IS THAT I THINK THAT TYPICALLY WE HAVE 45 DAYS MAXIMUM RIGHT FROM THE CLOSE OF A PUBLIC HEARING IN ORDER TO HAVE THE FINAL EIS DONE.
AND SO THIS IS NOW BACK IN, IN OUR HANDS.
AND I GUESS THE QUESTION THAT I HAVE LOGISTICALLY, I THINK THAT THERE ARE TIMES WHERE THERE'S EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES OR SPECIFIC ITEMS RIGHT.
BUT WE HAVE A 45 DATE PERIOD FROM OUR LAST JUNE 5TH, OR FROM THE 17TH MONDAY, RIGHT? 15TH? NO, FROM THE CLOSE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING, WHICH WAS MONDAY THE 17TH, JUNE 5TH.
NO, THE HEARING WAS AVAILABLE.
WE HAD THE PUBLIC HEARING, BUT THE COMMENT COMMENT, YEAH.
SO THE PUBLIC THAT ENDED JUNE 17TH GOT IT.
AND I THINK THAT MIGHT BE A COMMEND RECOMMENDED TIMELINE RATHER THAN A FIRM.
I THINK ALL THE SECRET TIME ARE, I THINK I'M, I'M HEARING YOU'RE HEARING VOICE VOICE.
THEY'RE SO, BUT I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE UNDERSTAND RIGHT.
YOU BE THE VOICE IN OUR HEADS.
SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT HOW WE'RE, THAT WE TAKE TIME TONIGHT TO
[01:00:01]
TALK ABOUT LOGISTICALLY HOW WE'RE GONNA STEP THROUGH THE PROCESS FROM HERE GOING FORWARD.AND OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE AN APPLICANT WHO'S SHOWING UP AND ANSWERING QUESTIONS AND PARTICIPATING.
AND NOT EVERY CASE HAS, HAS THAT OVER.
IF I MAY, UH, PETER BARR FROM DME ASSOCIATES, UM, WE, YEAH, WE WOULD BE WILLING TO WORK WITH THAT TIMELINE, UH, UH, WITH THE BOARD BECAUSE, UH, YOU KNOW, THEY DON'T, WE WANNA BE SURE WE DO THIS UPDATED NOISE STUDY ADDRESS, THE GHD COMMENTS, DO THE NIGHT SIMULATIONS.
THAT'S GONNA TAKE A LITTLE TIME AND WE WANNA MAKE SURE THEY'RE DONE THOROUGHLY AND COMPLETELY SO THAT YOU MOVE FORWARD.
SO WE'LL BE FLEXIBLE WITH THAT TIMELINE TO ALLOW US TO PULL OUR INFORMATION TOGETHER OVER THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS.
IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE THAT THE BOARD NEEDS ANSWERS ON OR FOUND THAT WE SHOULD BRING UP THIS EVENING? CAN WE GET THAT FLEXIBILITY AND THE WILLINGNESS TO WORK WITH THOSE ITEMS BACK IN WRITING TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT SO WE HAVE IT FOR THE FILE? YES.
YEAH, WE'LL PROVIDE THAT TO JOSH TOMORROW.
SO LIKE I SAID, WE'RE GONNA TAKE ALL THE COMMENTS THAT WE'VE GOT FROM THE PUBLIC THAT WE GOT FROM DC.
AND THEN WE'RE GONNA TAKE THE COMMENTS THAT YOU GUYS GAVE ON THE RECORD AND TRANSCRIBE THAT AND PUT THAT IN THERE.
AND THEY WE'RE GONNA SEND IT ADVOCATE SO THEY HAVE IT.
'CAUSE THEY'RE GONNA TAKE THE FIRST CRACK AT THAT PIS.
UM, AND THEN WE'LL GET THAT THING IN WRITING FROM YOU GUYS THAT THEY'LL BE FLEXIBLE WITH STUFF.
BECAUSE LIKE I SAID, THE TIMEFRAMES AREN'T MANDATORY, BUT OBVIOUSLY, YOU KNOW, WE MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ON TOP OF IT.
SO, UM, AND THEN WE'LL WORK WITH THEM HAND IN HAND IF THEY HAVE QUESTIONS FOR US OR WANT TO DIRECT INFORMATION TO YOU GUYS.
I MEAN, WE'LL, YOU KNOW, CROSS COORDINATE AND THEN, UM, WHEN THEY SUBMIT IT, WE'LL COME BACK.
SO AT THIS POINT IT'S STILL A WORK.
UH, IT'S A WORK IN PROGRESS AND WE DON'T HAVE A DATE WHEN THEY'LL BE BACK AT THIS POINT IN TIME.
WE DON'T NEED TO VOTE ON ANYTHING TONIGHT.
JUST A FOLLOW UP QUESTION ON SOMETHING YOU SAID.
AS I'M THINKING HERE, WE TALKED ABOUT THE NOISE STUDY FROM THAT RESIDENCE ON SOUTHWESTERN.
YOU MAY WANNA JUST FIGURE OUT IF WE NEED A VISUAL SIMULATION.
'CAUSE NOW THAT I'M THINKING ABOUT IT, THEY ARE THE CLOSER HOUSE AND I DON'T THINK THERE'S AS MUCH LIGHTING.
IF I'M REMEMBERING THAT'S THE BUG STATION AND THE PAY STATION IN THERE.
IT'S NOT THE SAME AS, UM, THE LIGHTING THAT DENNIS DOESN'T LOOK GET ON THE OTHER PROJECT IN THE VACUUMS. BUT JUST IF THERE ARE ANY LIGHT SOURCES OVER THERE, UNDERSTANDING HOW THEY ARE SHIELDED AND DIRECTIONAL TO FOCUS INWARD TO THE SITE AND NOT BE SPILL INTO THAT ADJACENT PROPERTY.
'CAUSE EVEN IF THAT HOMEOWNER ISN'T, HAS NOT APPEARED, SOMEBODY ELSE MAY LIVE IN THAT HOUSE OR, OR BE IN THE PROCESS OF PURCHASING IT OR SELLING IT OR SOMETHING.
YOU KNOW, WE WANNA MAKE SURE WE'RE RESPONSIVE.
AND THEN PROBABLY WHAT WE'LL DO TOO IS, UH, JOSH, PROBABLY WITHIN THE WEEK WE'LL GIVE YOU A WELL IDEA OF WHAT OUR SCHEDULE IS, JUST SO YOU CAN PASS THAT ONTO THE BOARD LETTER TO EXPECT IT, YOU KNOW, IN A COUPLE WEEKS OR, OR WHATEVER.
UM, WE HAVE THE MINUTES FROM JUNE 5TH.
UM, DOES ANYBODY WANT TO MAKE A MOTION ABOUT THE MINUTES? MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM JU, IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND.
IT'S BEEN MOVED IN SECOND TO APPROVE THE JUNE 5TH, 2024.
UM, AND THAT, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? I JUST WANNA REMIND EVERYBODY THAT THERE IS NO MEETING ON JULY 3RD, THAT OUR NEXT MEETING WILL BE THE 10TH OF JULY.
SO EVERYBODY HAVE A HAPPY FOURTH ALL MOTION TO ADJOURN.
IS THERE A SECOND? JUST SO YOU KNOW.
UM, CAN YOU DO ACTUALLY 10? SO WILL YOU, SHALL WE DO HAVE REMINDER THAT WE DON'T, THAT WE ARE JUST.